id
stringlengths 1
7
| text
stringlengths 59
10.4M
| source
stringclasses 1
value | added
stringdate 2025-03-12 15:57:16
2025-03-21 13:25:00
| created
timestamp[s]date 2008-09-06 22:17:14
2024-12-31 23:58:17
| metadata
dict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
37084 | What citation style is mainly used in political science?
According to Wikipedia, the most pertinent styles are Chicago and APSA, which is a variant of Chicago. But I could not find stronger references about this.
EDIT. The purpose of my question is the following. I am trying to build a quick help-sheet for scholars and students about the "citation" topic. Political science seems to be a discipline not very careful about the citation styles issue (compared to the STM fields), so I can't find clear information about the practice of its community.
This is really a question you should ask your advisor.
I'm not a scholar, and I don't need to write a paper, so I don't have an advisor. But as librarian I'm interested in how academic publishing works. Does your comment mean that there is no such thing as a common practice, and every advisor does what he prefers?
My comment just means that advisors usually know the prevailing citation style of an academic discipline and are better for this kind of advice than total internet strangers. But since you are not interested in writing a paper, perhaps you can get some initial hints here.
What's the underlying question? What problem are you actually trying to solve? What difference would the answer make to you? If we know that, we can give you a better answer.
Thank you all. I'm also new to SE so I need to find the best way to act here.
@Alexandros: I assume that academia.SE is not "total internet strangers" but a community of people knowledgeable about academia. I ask help here as much I ask to people around me :)
@EnergyNumbers: I am trying to build a quick help-sheet for scholars about the "citation" topic. Political Science seems to be a discipline not very careful about the citation styles issue (compared to the STM fields), so I can't find clear information about the practice of its community.
Ah, that's very helpful. Please can you edit that into the question? Would it be fair to say that your underlying question might be: what are the key elements that a help-sheet about the styling of citations should contain?
Hm, not really. I am specifically asking whether a common citation style is adopted or not in the Political Science academic community. (A legit answer would also be "none specifically").
The Purdue Online Writing Lab has a list of style guides for each discipline.
Political Scientist here. @aeismail is correct - different journals use different citation styles, as do different academic publishers. The best way around this is to use a reference manager (such as Mendeley or Papers) to not only manage your academic articles, but cite directly into your publications. These software packages are capable of formatting your citations in whichever style necessary.
With that said, my experience is that, generally, APSR's citation style is broadly accepted, with minor variation.
Thank you for your useful answer. I see a flaw though: you say "the best way around this is to use a reference manager" and I agree, but a RMS requires that you select the style that you want to use. So that does solve the problem of formatting the citations, but not the problem of choosing the right style - which was the object of my question.
Can you provide examples of software to format citations?
The best way to figure this out is to look at the "instructions to authors" provided by different political science journals on their home pages. (As an example, the Journal of Politics and Society expects authors to use the Chicago Manual of Style for citations. In general, for writing in the humanities, the Chicago guide is often a good starting point.
However, the better recommendation would be to use bibliographic software which will be able to reformat references into whatever style you need. Note that you don't need to have a subscription to the journals to access this information; it should be freely available on the website outside of any paywall the journal publisher may have.
This is hard to generalize because it depends on the type of journal your are submitting to and/or your department's requirements. Because I work in the public policy realm, APA is by far the most common style requested for journal articles. However, if you are writing a political philosophy piece or for a book chapter, Chicago is more common.
In your guide, you could say something like: "Because citation styles vary according to the type of publication, please search online for the journal name and 'author instructions' before you begin writing, or consult the editor or principal investigator of your project. You may also consider using a bibliography manager such as RefWorks, EndNote or Zotero to track your sources. These programs allow you to output references lists in different formats with minimal extra work."
Additional information on citation styles can be found:
http://gsrc.ucla.edu/gwc/resources/citation-styles.html
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/585/2/
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.033088 | 2015-01-19T09:18:37 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37084",
"authors": [
"410 gone",
"Alex",
"Alexandros",
"Carl Kevinson",
"David",
"FraEnrico",
"Jasmine Marievillegas",
"Jessie P",
"Khagendra joshi",
"Ryan Dougherty",
"Scribblemacher",
"Will",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10042",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100906",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100907",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100908",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100953",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101003",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101005",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101006",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101551",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116702",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118232",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123774",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27499",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96",
"peter englezos",
"user101005",
"vb0987"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
47244 | How helpful is it for PhD admissions to be second author of a paper in a recognised journal?
I recently submitted a paper to a fairly well-known journal and it got accepted. I'm listed as the second author. I'm a master's student. How much prestige is associated with this if I apply for a PhD?
There is no measurement unit of prestige.
It will depend to some extent on authorship norms in your field. For instance, in my field (pure math), being second carries exactly as much prestige as being first author, since authors are typically listed alphabetically.
How much prestige is associated with this if I apply for a PhD? — Exactly 147 micronobels.
@JeffE How did you arrive at an exact figure, the empirical tests I conducted gave me ≈ 146.4829 micronobels.
Ah, I see, you're an experimentalist. I'm a theoretician.
This is a normal and expected thing for graduate students to do. You should definitely list it on your CV and make it visible in your application to PhD programs and it will be a positive factor.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.033547 | 2015-06-15T14:12:41 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47244",
"authors": [
"JeffE",
"Max",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Ratnesh Sharma",
"Study Spectrum",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130283",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130284",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130285",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130289",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130300",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130301",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18330",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"interlinguex",
"luya1204",
"ranking srodków odchudzajacych",
"rumtscho",
"user119264"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
32835 | Should I write to invite a professor to be my PhD thesis examiner?
My supervisor has already invited formally the professor to be my examiner.
Do I need to invite the professor personally as he may learn more about my work?
Is there any conflict of interest to do so?
My uni explicitly said we must not contact examiners ourselves. I'd be slightly surprised if that's universal though. Check your rule-book.
Vote to close because it is too localised. It depends on the rules and procedures of the institution.
The way in which doctoral examiners are selected will differ between countries, between universities within countries, and within schools. Ask your supervisor for advice on what you should do here and follow their instructions.
Ask your supervisor but I've never heard of PhD students being expected to invite people to examine them. You're right to worry about conflicts of interest and appearing to try to influence your examiner by contacting them.
In just depends. In the US model, the examining committee is involved earlier on and it is normal for the student to ask them. For example, although I coordinated with my supervisor, I was the one who approached every person on my general and dissertation examination committees.
In my experience as an external examiner for dissertations in Canada, Europe, and New Zealand, I have always been invited to be an external examiner by a dean or department chair, with the formal invitation typically proceeded by informal discussions with the advisor. This is completely different from the situation where I am a member of the dissertation committee for a student at my own institution. In that situation, it's typical for the student and/or the advisor to ask me if I'm willing to serve. The committee is then formally appointed by the graduate dean.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.033697 | 2014-12-07T06:54:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32835",
"authors": [
"ABDULQUADRI ABDULGANIYU",
"BAPPER1",
"Brian Borchers",
"Davidmh",
"Jessica B",
"Jfkelxmcm",
"Lisa Shaw",
"Luiz Carneiro",
"Rafiu Giwa",
"Vidhi",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5962",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91665",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91666",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91667",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91671",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91681",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91682",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91697",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91743",
"ilias giannopoulos",
"mako"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
19642 | How to translate foreign-language theses into English?
i found many papers and thesis written in different languages than English, mainly Portuguese and Chinese. is there an efficient way to benefit from these papers and thesis instead of translating them using Google translate.
If you have access to the digital copies, then dump the entire thing into Google translate so you can skim read it. Having done that, it would be a good idea to find a native speaker and get them to check the translation of specific sections that seem relevant on the basis of the automated translations. I wouldn't suggest asking a native speaker to translate the whole thing, or even read the automatically generated translation of the entire thing.
Another thing you could do is see if you can find other papers that cite the papers that you're looking at. One of them may contain a summary that'll tell you if you need to bother pursuing that particular paper. This will be pot luck though, and it will be a lot easier to just use Google translate.
Of course, don't use Google's translations in your work; get a native speaker to help you when it comes to that.
It seems that Google translation has been improved quite a bit since last time I used it(a while ago). I just tested it using some articles in Chinese. The result is pretty much understandable.
Yeah, this method isn't going to be great for complex things of course, but at least it'll let you know which sections you can completely ignore, and will let you get the gist of the paper.
Yes. Knowing a language yourself is better, so is hiring someone who does if you can do that, but life is too short to not use Google Translate.
If you have some knowledge of the source language, you can use Linguee.com to find the best translation of a word out of documents which have been translated (EU commission's texts for instance).
Thus, you'll have the word in all its possible contexts.
This is very useful for legal or technical vocabulary.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.033921 | 2014-04-22T07:43:04 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19642",
"authors": [
"Colin McLarty",
"J. Doe",
"Jangari",
"Julia",
"Nobody",
"Nofak",
"Sitohsi Gobou ",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12923",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53599",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53601",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53646",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53667",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"myrtle42"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
55529 | New paper which is very similar, but subtly different, from previous paper
I wrote a paper that contains a fairly long and intricate proof. Now I have a new paper I am working on that extends this proof to a slightly different setting. Even though the overall setting is only slightly different, in my opinion this small difference is still quite noteworthy. For example, there are a number of other papers which use the result from the previous paper, and one can almost automatically get improved parameters for these applications.
The overall outline of the new proof is almost identical to the previous one --- it consists of about 5-6 pages with ~10 definitions/propositions, which occur in the exact same order in the two papers.
However, the proofs are subtly different --- I would say that the difference are far too subtle to merely hand-wave away with something like "We can show using a similar proof that ...." These differences are not confined to a single proposition either, they are spread out across the entire proof.
So, I am faced with a few options which seem less than appealing:
Copy the old paper nearly verbatim, with new proofs in the appropriate places. This has the advantage that the new paper will be mostly self-contained and readable. But the downside is that the is massive (self) plagiarism --- I am forced to copy pages of text without block quotes or specific attribution. (I of course state in my new paper that I am heavily copying from my old one, so there is some attribution)
Try to rewrite the old proof in a basically different way. This avoids the plagiarism problem. However, this will definitely not help the reader trying to compare the new result with the old one. It also seems perverse that a proof which was carefully laid out and understandable has to be restructured for no good reason.
Just mention the differences between the new paper and the old paper. But this will be almost unreadable unless the reader has a copy of the old paper and compares the two papers line by line. I would be forced to say something like "as was shown in Proposition 6.13 of [old paper], we have the following.... We then apply Proposition 6.14 of [old paper] and ...."
I am inclined to go with option (1). (If I was not the author of the old paper, it would make me much more queasy). Are there any good guidelines or suggestions for this situation?
What is your field? Are you in mathematics?
@Tom Church, I am in theoretical CS
In a comment below you mention that your new result is a substantial improvement from your old one. That doesn't appear in the question: rather you say "that extends this proof to a slightly different setting", which sounds like you are proving something which is analogous to the old result. Could you please edit the question to clarify this point?
I agree that option 1 is the best, but I think this option is not as unappealing as you think. Specifically, it's important to stress that if you cite the previous paper and acknowledge the parts that you are copying from it, then this cannot in any sense be considered self-plagiarism. At worst, it would be a reason to reject your paper for not being novel enough (which is an "honorable" reason for rejection, as opposed to self-plagiarism which is a form of academic misconduct).
I also notice that you mention that there would not be "specific attribution"; I'm not sure what you mean by this. I don't think it's necessary to delineate precisely every line that you copy from the old paper, or to point out every place where you modify a word here and there. Simply write the theorem, then write your 5-6 pages of definitions and propositions, preceding them with a statement along the following lines:
In the remainder of this section we prove Theorem 1.3. We remark that the structure of the proof closely resembles the proof of Theorem 2.3 from [citation], and consists of a sequence of definitions and propositions (Definition 1.4 to Proposition 1.11), which are fairly exact parallels (and in places identical) to the analogous sequence of definitions and propositions in section 2 of [citation]. Note that it is necessary to include the complete proof here rather than appeal to the results of [citation] due to the difference in the settings of our Theorem 1.3 and Theorem 2.3 of that paper, which requires certain subtle modifications to be made in a few of the arguments and definitions.
After the end of the proof, you may want to add a short discussion of specific places where the subtle changes in the arguments or definitions were inserted and why they were necessary. This would preempt a possible criticism that your paper repeats too much of the content of the older paper and is therefore not novel enough, and increase the chances that the new paper would be accepted.
What I would do, assuming this new development is worthy of publishing (which I cannot guess without knowing the contents - and the reviewers will do anyway):
Write the paper (the new one), in a self contained manner. Your previous work is a related work, goes in the bibliographical review. Compare and position your new paper wrt the old one, in the same way you would do if it was from another author. Including using the same proofs as references ("Theorem 4 from [1]"), for the ones that do not have differences. Don't copy stuff...
There is no problem if you paper is similar to another one. Just highlight the similarities and differences. I usually like such works, because subtle differences can be derived from different interpretations of the same stuff, which can lead to very cool stuff :)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.034141 | 2015-10-05T17:31:09 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55529",
"authors": [
"AndreasKralj",
"Ann B",
"David Harris",
"HY S",
"Lou Yurasits",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Sofie Flagstad",
"Tom Church",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/151983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/151984",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/151985",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/151991",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/151999",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167070",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167072",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/563",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7558",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"paul sparks",
"ummg"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
54636 | A weaker version of a published theorem with a simpler method; what should be done?
A paper contains three theorems. After submitting the paper, the author finds out that one of their theorems was already published by someone else with stronger result. Although their result is not as strong, the author’s method is much simpler.
They have two choices:
Keep the theorem and mention the result already done, and state that the method in current paper is simpler.
Just drop the theorem from the paper, and keep 2 theorems instead.
Given that they have already submitted the paper, the author just has to wait for referee's report. So their choice will come after the decision of the referee.
What would be the best choice?
You should definitely inform the editor ASAP, rather than waiting for the referee report. One reason is to avoid wasting the referee's time: they may vaguely remember having seen such a theorem but waste time trying to locate it for you when you already know. A second reason is to avoid looking like you are trying to influence the decision by withholding information (in the hope that it's more likely to be accepted if the referee doesn't notice that one theorem is already known).
I can't be the only one thinking - if the referee says nothing, then do nothing. The aim of the game is to get papers published, not to keep endlessly revising and re-submitting them whenever anyone else publishes anything.
@SimonB Regardless of what the referee notices, it's dishonest to present a result as new when you know someone else already obtained it. This is not (from my reading) a case of someone else getting a result after you, but an older result you didn't know about at first.
@SimonB The aim is to increase the sum of human knowledge. That this gets turned into a game of publishing as many papers as possible is unfortunate. And I can't be the only one thinking - it's a small step from lies of omission (not admitting the existence of prior work and hoping nobody notices it) to lies of commission (submitting things one knows to be false and hoping nobody notices).
Choice 1 seems pretty clear. It is honest about prior work (existing theorem) and the contribution (new proof).
You could also inform the editor that you have found a theorem that someone else has done, but that you believe your proof to be novel. This will allow the editor to better judge your work.
+1 for informing the editor who can in turn inform the referees who don't have to guess about the reason you didn't cite that other paper.
"You could also inform the editor that you have found a theorem that someone else has done, but that you believe your proof to be novel." Readers will want to know this, as well as the editor; so I'd suggest saying this in the abstract and/or introduction.
Whenever you can, include the reference and specifically explain the differences of both approaches, including the shortcomings of your method. It is a related work after all :)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.034649 | 2015-09-19T13:47:37 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/54636",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Aviva Graphic",
"David Richerby",
"Isayah",
"Kimball",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Sarah Johnson",
"Simon B",
"Slim Shady",
"Spam",
"Spammer",
"Sumyrda - remember Monica",
"Zilong Chen",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13138",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149194",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149195",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149196",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149197",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149214",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149250",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149251",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149270",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39206",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"user251657 spam"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
11112 | Can I annex fewer certificates for a shorter application?
I want to apply at a German university for Computer Science. The instruction tells me to annex documents about additional qualifications.
So I decided for the ten most important and most related qualifications and awards I got and wrote an overview page for them. They are grouped by field and date, and there is a short description of about two lines for every qualification.
Now I need to annex the actual copies of the certificates. I feel uncomfortable with handing in ten copies, plus some other documents. I think providing the certificate for every qualification might result in too much pages which won't get read but make a negative impression.
Can I just provide a few of the copies and tell the University staff to ask for more if wanted?
@Damien I want to apply to a very prestigious German university for an undergraduate program.
This question as written would also apply to students applying for graduate-level work in Germany, and therefore is on-topic.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.034916 | 2013-07-13T08:41:08 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11112",
"authors": [
"DS R",
"Hungry Coder",
"Nabin Chapagain",
"Sarah Boyd",
"Yijun Blue Yuan",
"Zoe",
"aeismail",
"danijar",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/154397",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27608",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27609",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27610",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27632",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27649",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7722"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
51712 | Should I require a student to acknowledge or change a color scheme from a common paper?
When I wrote my first paper, I experimented a bit with different colour styles until I found one that was both clear and aesthetically pleasing. I’ve since used it for all papers where I was first author. One of these submissions has been with a master’s student, who is now writing up his thesis.
He used the colour definitions from the paper for the figures in his thesis, which slightly irks me. Partly it is because this makes it harder to see which figures are cited from the paper and which are his own, partly because I put some effort into it. Is this so minor I should just let it go?
Update: As Wrzlprmft pointed out, using a consistent color scheme within a thesis is important for readability. Since recommending to use something and then requiring acknowledgement would be weird, I let it go.
A suggestion for the future: If you don't want your student or colleague to use your template or scheme, let him or her know right from the start. Communicating your preferences clearly to people will avoid unnecessary bitterness.
Sharing color schemes is not uncommon in the scientific community and I would take it as a compliment if one of my students wanted to use my color scheme.
Imitation is the third sincerest form of flattery (second only to citation and including someone as a co-author, naturally).
I don't think you can patent/copyright something like this. And this is not an oversight, it would be really stupid to allow one man to hoard a color scheme (whether by legal or cultural fiat). I think your best bet is to reevaluate your feelings.
"which figures are cited from the paper" That's not what "cited" means.
Would you rather he not use your beautiful color scheme?
this makes it harder to see which figures are cited from the paper — The figures from other papers are the ones with explicit citations, and the figures that are his own are the ones without explicit citations. Otherwise, he's either lying or plagiarizing.
@JeffE: That, or he's rather sloppy with his citations. Either way, it seems like a more appropriate thing for an advisor to point out than bickering over color schemes.
@tomasz When iterating through subsequent versions of the thesis during the supervision, it would be easier to spot which citations are missing. Anyway, Wrzlprmft pointed out that consistency is more important, to which I agree. No bickering happened. :-)
@JonathonWisnoski Of course you can trademark colors, which universities do. But it's unlikely to be done at the level of academic papers.
Unless I totally misunderstand what kind of colours we are talking about, your student did what I would consider best practice. Using a consistent colour scheme for all figures in a publication or presentation is a good thing for the following reasons:
It is aesthetically pleasing, in particular on posters and presentations.
If two plots have colour axis for the same variable or measure, it facilitates comparing them.
If colours encode the same things across plots (e.g., red is always species A, blue is always species B), it increases readability, as the reader does not always have to check the encoding for each figure.
This also holds across publications, if they are about the same topic.
this makes it harder to see which figures are cited from the paper and which are his own
Citations should suffice to indicate this. You cannot rely on stylistic mismatches to detect images from other sources anyway.
I put some effort into it
As Jakebeal already noted, developing a colour scheme is rarely a scientific achievement. And even if you consider it to be one, your student can cite it and reuse it. After all, being reused is what scientific results are for. Remember that many scientists use plotting and typesetting programs developed by other scientists.
An acknowledgement does not hurt though, but I would probably not be very insistent on it.
When considering consistency, it makes total sense that he reuses the color scheme and I would even recommend it now. Thanks for pointing it out! Since recommending to use something and then requiring acknowledgement seems tacky, I will just let it go.
@user54114 Take it as a compliment that not only you consider it nice :) I'm always pleased when people ask me: "What template for XYZ do you use? I really like it."
+1 for "Citations should suffice to indicate [which figures are from paper, which are student's contribution]."
Except in very unusual cases, a color scheme is not a meaningful scientific contribution. Just take it as a compliment and let it go.
Still, I think that full disclaimers are nice (especially when the style is not (yet) common and the reader may benefit from seeing the source of inspiration). Acknowledgements are not only for scientific contributions.
Isn't science supposed to be all about sharing knowledge? I quite regularly get annoyed by colleagues who are unwilling to share lecture notes (or color schemes) because "they have put some time and effort into it". That's such a poor argument -- it's not like that time would be wasted by sharing it, rather the opposite: if you share with me, I'll share with you, and we're both better off for it.
So take the use of your color scheme as a compliment that you developed something that worked, and make sure your students spends her time doing something productive rather than having to develop her own color scheme.
"it's not like that time would be wasted by sharing it, rather the opposite: if you share with me, I'll share with you, and we're both better off for it." - I agree the time would not at all be wasted; even though some people will not agree, I'd stop even earlier than this: If you share with me, and I use yours, there are already two people who have benefitted from the time and effort put into it rather than one. (Of course, that is spoken from my point of view as someone whose primary motivation for creating open source software is the hope that the code might be useful for strangers.)
@O.R.Mapper -- that's why I spend most of my time writing open source software as well. I like it if people use my stuff :-)
If you didn't want this student to use your color scheme, you shouldn't have let him look at your figures. Of course that applies not only to the student, but to everyone in the scientific community. If you really want to keep a color scheme to yourself, unfortunately you will have to keep to yourself the ideas which you would use that color scheme to express. If you do try to disseminate your ideas, and are especially unlucky, your color scheme will catch on and be used worldwide in very high profile publications (horror!).
As others have mentioned, a color scheme is rarely a scientific achievement. I would add that if you believe that it is, you may want to publish a technical note in a psychophysics journal or something. If this sounds ridiculously over the top, then perhaps you should reconsider whether your color scheme is so groundbreaking that you deserve acknowledgment. If you think something is worth acknowledging, you must give people something to acknowledge.
The best argument I can imagine for discouraging this student from using your color scheme is if he is misusing it in a way that obfuscates the intended content. Otherwise you might well be pleased that your efforts led to something so useful that others have adopted it.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.035097 | 2015-08-18T14:59:51 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/51712",
"authors": [
"Alexis Kasperavičius",
"Belinda Stronach Spam",
"David Richerby",
"JeffE",
"Jonathon",
"Kimball",
"Memj",
"NameGoesHere",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Omid Kayhani",
"Piotr Migdal",
"Rex",
"Soumyajit Chatterjee",
"Spammer",
"Unconventional Wisdom",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"aparente001",
"ayoubft",
"corsiKa",
"eMarketingnerds",
"geometrian",
"hecontor",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142325",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142327",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142333",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142335",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142340",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142342",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142343",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142409",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142424",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142594",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22628",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26631",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27555",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/29052",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36363",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8271",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877",
"semi-extrinsic",
"tomasz",
"user",
"user142327",
"user54114",
"yo'"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
131866 | My student in one course asks for paid tutoring in another course. Appropriate?
I'm a teaching assistant for an introductory programming course. A student in the course approached me and asked if I would tutor them for a different discrete mathematics course in return for payment.
I grade all of the material for the programming course, and so I feel like there's a conflict of interest in receiving any payment from the student, even if its unrelated to the programming course.
Am I overthinking it or is it right to think there's an issue here?
Though the original question is not related, see https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/127216/63475 and the other answers there, tldr: yes this is a problem. You are completely right to see an issue.
Can you tutor the student and then pay someone else to grade that student's work in the programming course?
I'm not in academia so this isn't an answer, but every employer I have worked for over the last 30+ years has had what they call the "newspaper test". Basically, if you read about the circumstances you described in a reputable newspaper would you, personally, have any cause to suspect even a hint of impropriety? If the answer is yes, don't do it. I would say your situation, should you take the money, would fail the newspaper test hugely, even in the corporate world (which, to be fair, is the only world I know).
If you want to help the student anyway, you can consider introducing him to a friend or colleague that does not have this conflict.
You're correct in feeling uneasy.
Even if you are not yourself improperly influenced, there would definitely be the appearance of possibility of improper influence, which is as important, in terms of the impact on other peoples' actions, as actual impropriety.
Even tutoring _for_free_, since you are in the same dept as the people giving the other course, could be perceived as improper, for various reasons.
Best to keep "squeaky clean", I think.
I should mention the programming course is in the CS department, whereas the discrete math course the student is taking is offered by the Math department. I'm not sure it'd be seen as improper with regard to that.
Less obviously so, but, still, same university, blah-blah-blah. It's not necessarily a reasonably criterion...
Even if it's a different university, it might still appear improper.
In the US university where I was a TA we were specifically instructed not to get anything worth more then $15 from a student while we are responsible for their grades. Otherwise the student or other students in the group can send a complaint to the dean and accuse you that your grading was biased.
In other countries, where customs, policies and procedures are different, the situation can be different (e.g., in Russia it would likely be fine). But if you work in the USA - I advise against accepting that offer.
The comments to my answer prompted me to add this update:
There are two issues here: an issue of personal integrity and an issue of administrative consequences. For the personal integrity, you can answer yourself: can you stay unbiased if you accept the offer? There are methods to handle it, like announcing all the policies in the start of the semester, using automatic grading with transparent standards that you cannot override, etc. You know yourself better than anyone, so you have to answer that question for yourself.
Now, the administrative aspect. Even if you know you were fair, someone can suspect and accuse you AND your student of cheating the system - and that's the issue of consequences. Consequences will depend on the local laws and policies and practices of your institution.
I sincerely hope that it is not going to be fine in Russia. At least, it should not be.
Bizarre accusations against the Russian system. Unless you have evidence?
Did you want to say that "in other countries with a higher rate of corruption, this may be rather tolerated"?
@Mayou36 that, too. But also, in Russia grades mean much less than in the USA, there is even no GPA stated on the diploma. So the conflict of interest is much lower. There are literally cases when a professor would say something like "Only God knows physics good enough to get an "A", I know enough to get a "B", and you... okay, here is "C" ". I am not exaggerating. The first time someone asked me about my grades was when I was applying to the PhD program in the USA - and that was something I did not expect at all.
@stevenpcurtis I got an undergraduate and a MS degrees in Russia - from two different universities.
@aehie I can't see evidence there. But don't let me stop you devaluing your education if that is what you want to do.
@stevenpcurtis As another graduate of a Russian university I don't think that was meant to be an accusation. Most of the teaching staff in Russia, TAs in particular, have severe financial trouble due to terrible funding and have to resort to doing odd teaching and consulting jobs to make ends meet, which is why giving extra lessons to one of your students in an unrelated field may be accepted as okay-ish, especially if the university is small and the teaching resources are scarce. It's still a morally grey area which could get you in trouble of course, but it will be less likely to happen.
I personally think it could be managed, but many others would disagree, including some people with direct authority.
I think it would be wise if you did a bunch of checking before you take this on. Check with the professors in both courses as well as the department head/chair. If any of them suggest it is a problem, then it is a problem. If all say ok, then it is probably fine, as long as you have some rules for yourself about what you can and can't do.
One or more of those people may ok it but suggest some rules as well.
You don't want to do anything improper of course, but you also don't want anyone else to think that you might be doing something improper.
I think that the likelihood of everyone being okay with this is so minimal that it's not worth the time spent asking. Most folks will default to a CYA answer of "no".
@DanielR.Collins, that might depend on your relationship to the people involved.
The thing is, OP would likely not be able to make the call of whether this is managable or not, themselves. And - it might get OP into trouble. Finally, the student might actually need a different kind of support than paid tutoring. See also my answer.
Of course, it can be managed -- most conflicts can, and this is a small one. The issue really is "is it worth the trouble"?
You should not accept...
You would be in an unacceptable conflict of interests if you accept payment directly from one of the students whose work you check and grade.
Also, you would likely be violating university bylaws/regulations, and could be subject to disciplinary measures and/or termination as an employee. I'm not saying that will happen, but it's not impossible.
... but offer to meet and talk.
Having said that - it's possible that what the student needs is not a paid tutor, but rather, s/he is having difficulty coping (more generally than just with discrete math), and wants the help of someone authoritative, familiar, who seems to have his/her best interest at heart. Consider offering the student to come by your office (*) during reception hours, or at some other time, for a talk. If nothing else, you would be helping him/her with a bit of emotional support.
(*) - if you don't have an office, that's a problem. Unionize, strike and get offices.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.036061 | 2019-06-14T00:13:42 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131866",
"authors": [
"Allure",
"Anton Menshov",
"Bernhard",
"Bryan Krause",
"Buffy",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"Granny Aching",
"Mayou36",
"Nick Hirzel",
"Scott Seidman",
"Spratty",
"aehie",
"einpoklum",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/105803",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109844",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20457",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27535",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44775",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50819",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52338",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56594",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74075",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett",
"stevenpcurtis",
"undercat"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
28784 | How do graduate schools evaluate GPA?
I am wondering how graduate schools like Stanford, Berkeley, Caltech, and MIT evaluate the GPA?
Because you can boost your GPA by taking easy classes and in the application it only says enter your GPA. Do they consider classes students have taken?
Do they consider whether course are challenging or not?
possible duplicate of How are GPAs from different universities evaluated for admissions to MS programs in the USA?
No It is not duplicate what I am asking is even from the same university you can take some very easy courses and boost your GPA, so straight A in basic and easy courses should be different than B in challenging courses. Now the question is how graduate schools take this into considerations?
The A in GPA is average. Not only GPA but also the transcript you will need to put in the application. GPA is high means not only you get good grades when taking easy classes, but also you get good grades in challenging classes. The admission commitee knows where to look by reading the transcript.
As a filter.
The main purpose of asking for GPA in grad school admissions is to quickly weed out people (like me) who have actually low GPAs. Nobody is admitted to top PhD programs solely on the basis of their GPA, or even primarily on the basis of their GPA. Other factors, including which classes you took, are more important.
If you have a high GPA, but no evidence of research potential, you will not be admitted.
It is a good answer but lets consider this scenario. You will take a challenging and important courses for your major and of course they are hard so you might end up with 3.2 GPA but somebody else takes some easy GE courses and some other easy courses before applying so his GPA might be 3.5. Now my question is how graduate schools look at these two numbers since there is no rule stating what courses you should have at the time of applying.
In my experience, neither of those students is likely to get in, without other seriously compelling evidence.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.036687 | 2014-09-20T07:00:04 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28784",
"authors": [
"Bob says reinstate Monica",
"JeffE",
"JimmyJames",
"Nene",
"Nobody",
"Phlyk",
"Psi-Ed",
"Wairagu Pauline",
"enthu",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20608",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78458",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78459",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78461",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78478",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78479",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78496",
"user59419",
"yatel"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
30504 | What is the recommender address and his/her title or position in graduate applications?
I was trying to fill out the graduate school application for graduate school. However in the "recommender info" part it asks me to enter the address, city, institute and title or position but I wonder what they are? should I enter the university address? is title or position like assistant or full professor?
I would be very appreciated if anyone can help me with that.
Ask the person who will write the letter of recommendation what address they want you to use. I suspect that this university will send them a return envelope to use to submit the letter, so the address must be their proper mailing address.
I would guess that Stanford applications are completely online. In any case, when I was asked by a recommendee what my address was, I thought "Doesn't this person know how to look things up on the internet?" Perhaps this was unfair, but it was my first impression.
It was unfair. I would guess that your address is your name at you department's mailing address (which is on their site), but if Stanford needs an official address for you, why not help a student out by giving it to them?
I did give it to them, without complaint. I also don't complain to students who ask questions whose answers are on the syllabus. But grad schools are looking to admit students who are independent and who have the ability to take the initiative and discover things on their own. Asking a recommender for his/her address strikes me as a (very small) data point to the contrary.
@Anonymous: Some universities are very labyrinthine and don't do a very good job with sorting mail. (Heaven knows how far my group's mail gets scattered across campus!) Asking might be a way to make sure you get the right information. You could ask the address I want to list for you is "X." Is this correct?
@Anonymous: Ridiculous. Aeismail's comment is spot on. Also, maybe graduate admissions committees also want to admin students who are diligent, precise, and exacting, in which case, verifying the address with the letter writer is a small data point in the plus column.
These days, most people who could serve as a good recommender have a professional website that will give their full contact information, including their full title, mailing address, etc. You can typically find this either by Google or by going to their organization's website, which will somewhere have a list of faculty and other significant staff.
If this information is not publicly online (most likely to happen with a recommender from a company) then just ask your recommender to give their preferred contact information.
I think the OP should not rely on the online information, because it has the risk of being outdated or being changed over the time. It's always the sure way to ask the recommender what is his precise contact information.
Usually, what actually matters is the email and phone, which departments are actually pretty good at keeping up to date.
Lookup the mailing address for the academic department in question. This can be easily found on the department's website. And yes, position is something like assistant or associate professor.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.036914 | 2014-10-25T03:01:33 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30504",
"authors": [
"Anne",
"Anonymous",
"Ashley K",
"Bill Barth",
"Gangadhar tadiboina",
"Hex",
"Pedro",
"Shuvo Habib",
"Soujanya Thallapalli",
"Trevor Glyn Locke",
"aeismail",
"enthu",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11565",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84296",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84297",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84298",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84367",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84391",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84392",
"jakebeal"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
36500 | How long between the acceptance and proof correction of Elsevier?
My paper has beed accepted by Elsevier's International Journal of Electronics and Communications (AEUE).
I want to know how long I should expect to wait until I receive the notice of online proof correction.
Note that "Elsevier" here is irrelevant: the publisher doesn't have anything to do with publication time frames. All that is up to the editors and referees.
You can answer this question is to look at the date stamps sequences on some of the existing papers. Many journals (including the one you have asked about), include all of the major dates in the publication process, e.g., "Received Date1, Accepted Date2, Available Online Date3," as well as the final date of publication.
Note that the "Available Online" and final date of publication may often be very different, but except in rare cases it is "Available Online" that you should care about because that is when people begin to be able to get your paper. However, some journals do not do all of the final proof correction until closer to the date of publication, but essentially just have your preprint up online for quite some time!
Applying this analysis to this particular journal, one can find the following:
Acceptance to available online looks like 1-3 weeks
Final publication happens ~6 months later
So you will probably get contacted about the proof very quickly (if they follow the normal method of proofing before online availability), or not for several months (if they do late-binding proofing).
Thank you for your answer! I hope I can receive the notification in this month.
The process between acceptance and receiving proofs contains a few steps. First the paper is likely to go to a copy-editor to check for inconsistencies in formatting and other issues dealing with the way the publisher wants the material presented in the final product. Following this is the type-setter who will set the paper, collate a set of questions, if any remain, for you to correct and then send out the proof for you to carefully proof read. The persons involved may have varying workloads, they usually are not working with one journal alone. In addition, the flow of papers is rarely constant in time so their workload can also vary in time for that reason.
As a result the time can vary substantially. I would say that a month is by no means unreasonable, it could be slightly shorter but can also be significantly longer. If the journal published on-line and provides acceptance dates on the published papers, you can estimate this by looking at the dates for acceptance and publishing on-line. This period also includes authors proof reading and final correction by the type-setter but that is usually about 2-3 weeks in total (can vary of course).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.037210 | 2015-01-09T06:47:35 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/36500",
"authors": [
"Andnot",
"HPKaleibar",
"LAWAL NAFIU",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Robert Patchouli",
"Tolga",
"gopala-kr",
"hannibal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27581",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99079",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99081",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99085",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99097",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99117"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
38413 | How does one address a tenure-track offer that is below expectations
I'm about to receive a tenure-track offer and was already informed about the offered salary. Unfortunately, the salary is barely an increase over my current postdoc salary. (In fact, taking into account the tax differences at my current location vs the location of the tenure-track institution, it's going to be a net pay cut.)
Also, the salary is below the range that the department head indicated during my visit. I was very excited about the prospect of joining the institution, but now I'm wondering whether all the hard work during several years (which were very successful research-wise) of being a postdoc was in vain.
I do have another offer (but for a non-research based industry job) and a couple more interviews (for tenure-track jobs) scheduled.
How do I best approach the situation without giving the impression as being someone who's overly demanding or gaming the system?
At the very least, it seems appropriate to contact the department head as you're outside the range mentioned by them. I'd formulate it as a mere inquiry, like "I remember you mentioned an approximate range of (...). Now my offer came in as (...), and I'm a bit puzzled." He'll likely hide behind bureaucratic hurdles ("I wish I could change this, but administration..."), but this isn't a good sign for your future there, and the discrepancy alone would make me strongly consider alternatives. It's unprofessional and (probably) dishonest.
@gnometorule The thing that really throws me off is that the head of the department didn't seem to think that they needed to break this news incredibly carefully if there really were unavoidable issues keeping them from offering the salary they were expecting. I find that really odd and worrying.
I think you tell the chair of the department some version of what you've told us: you're very excited about joining the institution (very important to say that first!), but you don't feel like the the salary is appropriate for the position, and you would find it much easier to accept the offer if the salary were increased. Negotiating over salaries is quite normal, not overly demanding or taking some kind of advantage. Of course you might well not be successful, but people often are.
Negotiating is not fun (at least for me), but it doesn't have to be that hard, especially when you have some leverage. I would mention the fact that you feel the current offer is an effective pay cut from your present position (it's up to you whether to mention your current salary), and that you're very confused about the fact that offered salary is lower than the range the head himself mentioned. Mention the (presumably more lucrative) industry job and its salary, though you should probably make it clear that you don't expect to be matched (unless you won't come unless it will. Obviously, then you should say that).
Re "when you have some leverage." Now is the only time that you'll have leverage, at least until you go out and find another job offer at a higher salary.
Negotiating salary is a very common thing. You should explain that this offer is low in comparison with your current post doc salary or the salary available to you in industry and that you don't feel that you can accept the offer at the current salary. You might also bring up salary survey data to support an argument that the offered salary is low. They might respond by increasing the offered salary or they might not.
There are several reasons why they might not be willing to negotiate on salary. It might be that the salary is determined by a union contract or some official pay policy of the institution. Even if the administration has the flexibility to offer a higher salary they may not want to do so if it would result in you getting higher pay than current faculty members.
In my experience in the US it is often possible to negotiate a somewhat higher starting salary than your initial offer, but it is seldom possible to get a substantial increase (of say more than 10% above the initial offer.) Furthermore, you can reasonably expect that if you negotiate a higher starting salary you might receive lower pay raises than you would otherwise get in later years.
I would encourage you to look at how long term faculty in the department are currently paid. If they seem underpaid to you, then you can reasonably expect to be in the same situation in a few years.
"but it is seldom possible to get a substantial increase (of say more than 10% above the initial offer." I disagree with that. On the one hand, it happened to me that simply mentioning another offer got a 30% increase. (That number is probably much more rare; I've always found their low initial offer confusing.) I've seen many more instances now, and I think that it is very often the case that a public research university will match some other university's offer to get a strong candidate...and some try to save some money by making "first offer salaries" correspondingly lower.
For instance, if we made an offer at my department, and someone else had another offer from a peer or aspirational peer institution that paid 15-20% more, I would be most distressed to learn that they decided not to further negotiate with us. I don't like your answer for that reason. Also: "Furthermore, you can reasonably expect that if you negotiate a higher starting salary you might receive lower pay raises than you would otherwise get in later years." My experience is exactly the opposite: e.g. at my university, standard raises are a percentage of your salary.
However,there is a distinction to be made between "I have an offer at University X for $Y" and "I have no other offer right now and I'd like my starting salary to be increased." I agree that the latter doesn't work to get much of a raise. If that's what you meant, I apologize for misinterpreting it.
Obviously we disagree about what is common in practice. I think we agree that it's reasonable to negotiate for a higher salary, but you think that a substantial increase of more than 10% is likely, while I'm saying that it's unlikely. Clearly, we have different experiences. I'd certainly be curious to hear about how things work out for the person who posted this question.
What I'm saying is that, with an outside offer in hand, it is likely enough to be taken into account. I didn't really tell my full story, but when I heard the amazingly low initial offer I got from one university -- 30% lower than what a second university had told me, with other still to come -- I thought that I just couldn't even continue dealing with them. But someone I know was externally involved in the hiring process, and he told me to absolutely give them a chance to match the offer...which they did. This phenomenon has recurred many times over the years.
I agree that you should attempt to negotiate salary in this situation- I'm just saying that one shouldn't "expect" a large (e.g. 30%) increase in the salary. I think your story is an unusual one.
I agree: 30% is quite unusually large. There's a lot of room between 10% and 30%. As I said, my point is that if you have an outside offer and you are still interested in the position, then you should convey the outside offer. You shouldn't expect anything, and if one of our candidates got an outside offer that was 15-20% higher, I honestly don't know whether it would be fully matched. But because of this, suggesting a figure like 10% as an upper bound doesn't seem so helpful: maybe they can do better than that, maybe they can't.
In this case, the OP says that the starting offer is scarcely larger than the postdoc salary. I don't know what European postdocs make, but I'd be surprised if it were over $50K per year. An initial offer of $55K for a STEM (let's say: there was a postdoc, after all) tenure-track job at a US university is...well it depends on the university, but it's certainly closer to the "room for more than 10%" end of the range. It's worth it to the OP to be very serious about this kind of thing: 5% more salary per year over 30 years is very significant.
Actually, $55K for 9 months was the median starting salary for assistant professors in bachelors granting departments of mathematics reported in the AMS's 2013 salary survey. This varies a lot by type of institution (all the way up to the mid $80K range for new assistant professors at the largest research universities), but there are a lot more job openings at the low end of this range then the upper end. One issue here might be the difference between 12 month and 9 month salaries.
@PeteL.Clark It is a bit hard to compare, and changes with the exchange rates, but at the currect rates, my salary is just about $50k before taxes. As far as I can tell, the Danish salary would be closer to $70k before taxes at current rates.
@Tobias: Danish postdocs (in math?) get $70K?? Wait, I have a student who did a postdoc in Denmark. I'll ask him...
@PeteL.Clark Ohh, and for comparison, a Danish PhD has a salary fairly close to $50k at the current exchange rates (still before taxes).
Anyway, I should leave my own answer at this point rather than further pestering Brian.
Danish salaries are high, but that's necessary given the insane cost of living. I remember the first time I was in Aarhus and I went to get some pizza after checking into my hotel. I had to spend the equivalent of 35 us dollars to get a mediocre personal pizza and a coke (nb: this was not a fancy place; it was basically a diner with counter service). It makes e.g. London and NYC look cheap.
@AndyPutman That seems high even by Danish standards. I would expect to pay about half that at todays rates. But what really forces so high wages is that the taxes are so high (as in, 40%+).
Let me add some thoughts to current answers.
First, on why the salary offer is lower than you were led to believe: the department head, who cannot decide the details of the offers, was likely making a vague guess, possibly based on offers in previous years. (Hopefully s/he was not being intentionally deceptive.) I don't know how the department head indicated to you a salary range--perhaps if you directly asked they had to make a quick guess based on information they didn't have. Or maybe they made a reasonable guess that you misinterpreted. Or maybe the administration is being stingy (e.g., perhaps there have been recent budget cuts, or perhaps there has been a change in adminstration).
Often the department head is on your side, and will be negotating for you so you can be frank with them (hopefully you have some idea of whether this is true or not from your discussions). You should ask why there is a difference between what you were led to believe and the initial offer. In addition to the comparison with your current salary and the industry offer, you should mention you have other academic interviews. Comparing industry salaries to academic salaries is apples and watermelons, so the administration may not be be that moved by your industry offer. However, if you have other interviews set up, it's possible the department head can convince the dean or whoever that you're highly desirable and will be likely to quickly accept if you can get a competitive offer (if this is true, make it clear to the department head).
Otherwise, you should try to defer on making a decision until you have your other interviews. If you can get other academic offers (with a higher salary) before you have to make a decision, it is much easier to negotiate. Also sometime soon (depending on the deadline and time of interviews, maybe now, or maybe at the time of the other interviews) you should let the other interviewing schools know you have a decision with a deadline upcoming so they can try to speed up their decision process about you.
However, given that the initial offer was low in your eyes, there's a good chance that the administration will not be willing to make an offer that is significantly higher, so prepare yourself in case you need to make a difficult decision.
Did you check the AAUP salary survey for that institution and peer institutions?
You can use that as the basis as a request for a reconsideration of the salary. Note that such a reconsideration is likely to only yield modest results ($5000 or so max) and carries with it the small but real risk of having the offer withdrawn (see horror story here).
I've negotiated my salary and/or lab/startup packages up at all the institutions I've worked at using comparison data from other schools and/or the real needs of doing the work I do; but both were pre-recession.
Be careful.
More about that horror story here
That's an interesting story (+1), but merely asking if a salary increase is feasible (or merely adjusting it to what was mentioned before) is far less extreme than asking for 5 substantial employment contract adjustments, as in the case linked. I don't think there is much of a risk in OP's case discussing their more limited goals.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.037474 | 2015-02-06T19:35:23 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38413",
"authors": [
"Andy Putman",
"Ben Webster",
"Brian Borchers",
"Grace",
"Kenneth F.",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Russell",
"Sascha",
"Tibor Tarnai",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"ff524",
"gnometorule",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104706",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104707",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104708",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104709",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104713",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104715",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104716",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104717",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104766",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4384",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4513",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"loopthedoop",
"striker10",
"user104709",
"Я Тебя Вижу Joker"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
45956 | Is it harder to get into PhD programs for some disciplines compared to others?
Anecdotally it seems much harder to get into a good math program than a computer science program. How true is that? Are there any statistics available on the selectivity of different disciplines?
It's true. I don't know about any statistics, but surely the ratio between the number of applicants and the number of available, possibly funded, places is one main factor that determines the difficulty in entering a PhD program.
Statistics might be hard to come by, but you can always checks the requirements of the Phds on the webiste of universities.
In my alma mater (Canada), two were particularly easy to enter: psychology and semiotics. You could start them directly after a simple bachelor degree, you did not have to go trough a Master beforehand and, the teachers would try to entice you to do one. Anybody could do one even with relatively bad grades.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.038540 | 2015-05-24T17:39:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/45956",
"authors": [
"CYr",
"Grace",
"Khurram Khalil",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Spammer",
"anon34278473888",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126381",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126382",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126383",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126419",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126578",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"integer"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
16985 | Should I publish a given unit of work in more smaller papers or fewer larger papers?
Having just spoke with my advisor, and speaking on occasion with other professors, I have come to the impression that one should not "subpublish." Let me say what I mean. I'm a 3rd year graduate student right now, and the professors I talk to seem to say that it is not a good idea to publish many small papers along the way to a result: that is, holding fixed the total mathematical content across N papers, it is best if N is minimized. I was trying to understand why. My advisor cited the reason of "reputation" and I have invented my own reason that perhaps there is an upfront cost to the process of writing and submitting a paper so that although effort per length may be constant, it is to my advantage to pay the upfront cost as few times as possible. (Finding a referee is the only upfront cost that comes to mind, but keep in mind I've never done this before.)
Can someone expand upon how reputation is relevant here i.e. for fixed mathematical content why it looks bad to come out with many small papers? Are there also benefits to the community or the knowledge pool that I'm trying to expand however slightly by writing such papers if it all comes at once in one big paper? One would think that if I "subpublish" that actually since my results become available more immediately that it would benefit the community if I did so. The only person it would seem to possibly hurt is me if I were to get scooped.
Are there other ways in which upfront costs to the whole process of publishing may happen?
I am interested in all my questions in both advantages and disadvantages to me, and also to those who would use my work.
Wikipedia on least publishable unit
Your username is similar to someone we miss these days here on Academia SE
To address the reputation aspect:
Think about a typical reader of your papers. Most likely they will only look at one paper you have written. Unless you impress them with that one paper the likelihood of them reading anything else you have written depends on whether that first paper convinces them it is worth their time to read another. So the more content that is in each of your papers the more impressed the reader will be with you. If the first paper of yours someone reads has a small amount of mathematical content then they probably won't expect too much from any of your other papers.
In your formulation the ideal N may not always be 1, but each paper should actually have something worthwhile in its own right to say. You shouldn't expect someone to read more than one paper to get to only one meaningful idea.
A side comment, the author does not find referees. The editor does. Sometimes the author may suggest candidates but the editor or the suggested referee can always say no.
In math it's generally better to aim for fewer, longer, better papers. There's nothing wrong with publishing short papers if that's what best fits your discoveries. However, given the choice you should not publish your results piecemeal as you derive them, but rather try to collect and polish them and craft coherent, substantial papers. There are several reasons for this:
Publishing partial results piece by piece makes it harder to write understandable papers. A few papers later, you'll wish you had done things a little differently, and you'll start writing things like "by the same idea as in the proof of Lemma 3 in [15]" because the statement of Lemma 3 doesn't quite say what you need now. But it's too late to change it, so your next paper is either cryptic or repetitive, and neither one impresses readers. Or you find an ad hoc way around it, but your paper ends up being a little less natural. Basically, this is a form of technical debt. Once you have enough technical debt, the only good solution is to write a clean exposition from scratch. Every topic eventually reaches this point (which is one reason we have expository papers and books), but in the meantime you'll minimize the problems if you gather related ideas in one place and write them as a coherent unit.
If you break your work into papers in unnatural ways, you risk looking desperate for publications. Each individual paper may look like you don't understand the big picture or don't think your work is going to amount to anything substantial. These are not messages you want to send to readers.
If you want a serious research career, you need to publish in good journals. Taking a long paper in a prestigious journal and breaking it into three short papers in less prestigious journals is bad for your CV. Experts might know those three papers amount to something substantial when combined, but a non-expert looking at your CV won't be able to tell.
Many people in your subfield will form an opinion of you without having studied your work carefully. For example, plenty of people who have never read any of your papers will see you give talks at conferences or will see references to your work. Because they don't have a global context for your work, to a first approximation they will judge you by how good they think your average paper is.
One would think that if I "subpublish" that actually since my results become available more immediately that it would benefit the community if I did so.
If you reach a nontrivial milestone that is genuinely exciting or useful for other people, then that could be a good reason to publish a paper now, rather than sitting on the result while you try to complete a larger project. On the other hand, there's much less value in presenting a steady stream of partial results taken out of context.
Of course career pressures sometimes interfere with ideal publishing. If you're going on the job market soon, then writing a suboptimal paper now is probably better than writing an optimal paper later.
(My answer somewhat overlaps with previous answer, but contains parts that in my opinion need to be said. Beware that I am a fundamental mathematician, and that my advices should be taken with extra caution in other fields.)
I would say that in most cases a good way to go is to get each paper tell one story. This both means that the story should be complete, and that there should not be two stories in it.
Now, in many cases choosing the perimeter of a paper is a subtle issue and your interest and the interest of the community do not necessarily align completely.
Pros for publishing several smaller papers:
It can be difficult to get a long paper published in a good journal, because of a limited number of pages published each year (this sounds weird at a time when most papers are distributed electronically, but many math journals have this issue). For example I had a long paper, containing different independent results on a common object, rejected by a journal after the referee found the results nice, but the paper too long for its worth. Maybe one of the result would have been equally sexy on its own, and the paper would certainly have been much shorter.
Your CV will have more lines, and this can sometimes help. Every hiring committee I attended to put an emphasis (too strong in my opinion) on the number of papers of each applicant.
If there are different results that may be of interest to different communities, putting them in one paper mean that they will appear in only one journal, maybe not read by both communities, and that there will be only one title and one item and review in each database (MathReviews, Zentrallblatt). This can make one or both of the results more difficult to find, less visible, therefore less useful to the community.
Pros for publishing less, longer papers
It can be difficult to publish a short paper in a good journal, as it might appear as not tackling a challenging issue. Of course, a short paper solving a long-standing open problem will be easily published, but when you have to convince an editor and a referee that your question is good and that answering it deserves merit, short paper may (unfortunately) hurt you.
Long papers can impress people on CV. I have heard in hiring committees remarks like "she publishes 30 pages papers, this is serious work" or "Ok, he has a lot of papers, but he mostly seems efficient in maximizing the number of CV lines from little mathematical content". If your introductions are all the same, it can look like salami publishing; in our publish or perish era, one is expected to salami publish without looking like he or she is salami publishing.
Sometimes, two or more results complement each other and are together worth more than the sum of their individual worth. In this case, a unique large paper may be much better than several smaller papers that individually will look minor.
Concluding comment
You see that I gave each argument both ways. This is why I think the issue is subtle, and that each case has to be considered closely. The "one story" guideline can help but is not very precise. Finally I would advise to try to maximize the benefit of readers (remembering they have limited time); try to imagine what a referee that does not yet know your work will feel reading your paper, and make your choice so that he or she thinks "what a nice result!" (the result needs to be somewhat impressive by itself, but also to be clear and clearly delimited). In most cases and in the long run I believe it will also be close to maximize your own benefit.
This is highly field specific. In many STEM fields, multiple small papers are preferred because the field moves very quickly and people would get scooped if it took them 2-3 years to write a paper. This is much less of a concern in mathematics. Most mathematicians are very careful and take their time to write thorough and complete larger papers.
In some situations, people will judge you by counting the number of papers you have written. Administrators in funding organizations or universities might do this, for example, or HR people working for job search agencies or prospective employers. They won't read the papers, and they wouldn't understand them even if they did. So, in these situations, more papers is better.
These people will also look at which journals the papers were published in and it's important to them that you're publishing in good journals. The top journals aren't interested in publishing the mediocre papers that result from slicing what should be one paper into several parts. It's much better for your career to have one paper in a good journal than three papers in a poor one.
@DavidRicherby In contrast, I've gotten several papers in good journals by separating out a project - the notion that a larger paper is inherently better is one that is not invariably true.
@Fomite Of course. If a project contains several units that are relatively self-contained and each is interesting in its own right, it can make good sense to publish each unit as a single paper.
@David -- in my experience, HR people working for job search agencies or prospective employers will not care which journals you published in. They might be influenced by impressive-sounding names, but not much more.
@bubba That depends entirely on whether you're looking for jobs within academia. Since this is Academia SE, I assume it's academic jobs we're talking about, which means that your application is being judged by people who know exactly what are the good journals in the relevant field.
@David -- yes, of course. But, I assume "Academia.SE" is for people who are currently in academia, not just those who intend to remain in academia for ever. I thought it would be obvious from references to "HR people" and "job search agencies" that I wasn't talking about jobs in academia.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.038701 | 2014-02-14T23:12:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16985",
"authors": [
"Austin Buchanan",
"Bibek Sharma",
"David Richerby",
"Dima",
"Fomite",
"Md. Adib Ibne Yousuf",
"Muhammad Ahmad",
"Yu Jiang",
"argh",
"bubba",
"dieuvn3b",
"eccstartup",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11940",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2823",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45812",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45813",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45814",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45815",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45818",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45819",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45821",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45822",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45823",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45828",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45829",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45835",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9749",
"jehanzeb",
"katrocitus",
"kmshannon",
"krammer",
"smfrgsn"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
28133 | Is it appropriate to ask for letters of recommendation from professor on maternity leave?
A professor who knows me very well is currently on maternity leave (her baby arrived in late April).
This professor has known me for 4 years (since first semester of undergraduate career) and also advised my undergraduate thesis (2 semesters). In addition I also did an independent study course with her, and she has provided me funding from her own grant money in the past in order to pay for me attending academic conferences.
I am planning to apply to several master's programs, possibly PhD, in addition to other things that require such letters (Teach for America, Summer School, etc.). All of these things require letters of recommendation.
Is it appropriate to ask her for letters of recommendation on her maternity leave, and if so, how should the request be phrased in email?
Yes
I think It would be different if say, you took one or two of her classes. But it sounds like she advised you a great deal, and thus she should have some investment in your educational success. Especially if you have talked about graduate school before. What is important is you give her notice as soon as possible so she can find some time to do it: Having a newborn is no easy job.
I would phrase it as follows:
Dear X (unless you call her professor, then Professor X, but my
advisors I call by their first name)
How is your newborn?
I realize you are very busy with your maternity leave, but I was
hoping you might have some time to write me a strong letter of
recommendation for graduate school. As you might know I am interested
in ZQR, and your mentorship over my senior thesis has been essential
to my education.
Thank you for your time,
user
I'd also like to add that while I was applying to PhD programs, the professor who eventually became my advisor was on maternity leave while I was asking her questions about the lab. In confidence, she enjoyed my emails because having newborns, while a joy most of the time, often lacks the intellectual rigor that most people are accustomed to in their day to day conversations.
My guess is she will be very happy to do this, and somewhat expects you to ask.
"Professor X" sure has a nice ring to it... :)
I couldn't help myself.
I agree with the gist of this response, but, as a professor and a mother, I'd be annoyed with an extraneous question ("How is your newborn?"), since it takes time to answer and may be emotionally loaded. I'd prefer a general good wish: "I hope you and your family are doing well."
I also wouldn't ask for a "strong" letter of recommendation. I understand what you're trying to say, but the phrasing could be better: "hoping you would be willing to write me a positive letter of recommendation".
The only thing I would add was to give them a very long window to be able to write in.
@Fomite That might not be possible, but tell her what the deadline is in any case.
It is fine since it doesn't take too much time. However, you should ask the professor very politely. Remember just invite one time, if the professor says no you shouldn't invite anymore and say thanks to conclude the request. Anyway, in such case, it would be better if you are very familiar with the professor.
Such a short answer does not add anything to the already existing one. You might want to consider elaborating more.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.039589 | 2014-09-07T06:55:48 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28133",
"authors": [
"Bob Brown",
"Ellen Spertus",
"Fomite",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Neo",
"Nishan D'Souza",
"WhiteLies",
"a13a22",
"apnorton",
"emma",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16183",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/269",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6898",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76161",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76162",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76163",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76165",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76166",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76183",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9934",
"iheggie",
"user76162"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
41371 | What do I do if my part-time master's program is changed to full-time?
I am stuck in an unusual situation. I was admitted to a part-time master's program. The classes were supposed to be held in the evening and the expected degree duration was 6 years.
After only one year, the graduate school decided to change its policies, and abolished the part-time master's which meant that all classes were now held in the morning. Needless to say this, this made it very difficult for people like me who were doing a full-time job in the morning, to continue their master's. It became really difficult to adjust classes in such a way to cause the least interference with my work shifts, and I could not afford to leave my job.
Four years forward, i have managed to pass almost half of my courses, but my grades have suffered heavily due to unattended classes and missed assignments.
I am also quite dissatisfied with the quality of teaching and the general environment of our department. The teachers seem disinterested, there is general mismanagement and very little scope for research, not to mention almost no research funding.
My questions are:
1.) How common is it for gradate schools to change policies like this? What can a student do in such a situation?
2.) If I decide to drop out from this current program and decide to apply to a more accomplished program abroad (now that I have some savings), how could I explain the unfinished master's and the bad grades in my application? Would the previous unsuccessful stint in Master's hurt my chances of being admitted to a reputable graduate program?
Frankly, the administration of this department/University should be ashamed of itself. They needed to work out special arrangements with the students of this program (independent study arrangements, deals with a partner university, special arrangements with any instructors for submitting assignments etc.) I know of many graduate programs that have been cancelled but none that basically prevented their current students from finishing.
Have you been paying tuition all along? If so it seems to me you have at least some argument that you deserve at least a partial refund. This is very unusual behavior on the part of the institution in question.
1) I have no answer for this one.
2) Pretty much the same way you explained it to us. Your seem to have legitimate reasons for lower grades and/or dropping out. If you decide to apply for graduate programs abroad make sure to explain this in your statement of purpose. Take your time to word it perfectly. It can make all the difference. The fact that you committed to a six year graduate program while working a full-time job shows passion and dedication. You want to make sure that comes through in your statement.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.039896 | 2015-03-09T19:56:29 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41371",
"authors": [
"Ankit Sharma",
"Corvus",
"JaJuPhi",
"Manu",
"WetlabStudent",
"elduderino260",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111613",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111615",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111618",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111619",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111640",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27900",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"nturner"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
106883 | In academia, does the amount of material that one has to learn diminish as time progresses?
From my own point of view, the first year of a PhD is heavily packed with new information, theory, techniques, conventions, experimental abilities, etc. Let us call all these elements "material". This new material required a lot of effort which I felt as a heavy burden in comparison to my master thesis or any previous academic experience. This burden was also complemented by requirements of the PI, funding entities, bureaucracy, etc.
The second year was also heavily packed with new and deeper material. But the burden of acquiring this new material was in my opinion, lower. This perception of a lower burden can be due to better learning methods, more experience, a more relaxed view on life, due to actually less new "material" to deal with.
I felt as if I had to sustain the same first year burden for several years, I would eventually collapse. And even though the second year burden was lower, I would not be able to continually perform at a good level under such burden.
Is there any point in an academic's life where the burden diminishes? I enjoy learning new stuff, carrying out new experiments and acquiring new skills. But the rate at which I feel this is necessary during a PhD is for me too high and I would not like to have a permanent life under this burden.
Just to be clear, it is obvious that in Academia it is necessary to acquire and master new "material" continuously. My question focuses on the "rate", if it makes sense.
Academia is remarkably similar to raising children. Your workload, challenges and worries will not diminish, only change. Soon enough you will be writing grant proposals, serve on committees and be generally overworked. ...
Yes, reading and understanding a paper will be quicker and easier, and that's a good thing, too, because you won't have a lot of time before you have to review two manuscripts and one thesis, adjudicate two grad students' feud and deal with one instance of academic misconduct in your committee today.
Oh, my sweet summer child... ;)
I once told a math professor that I was sometimes discouraged by math; because I would struggle for a week to learn concepts in one field, feel slightly accomplished, then look in the vicinity and find many more mountains to climb. He looked at me and said "Well I have bad news for you; it never gets any easier."
The first paper I read took two months to process.
Now, I can skim through two papers for breakfast. It is not that you get more material to read, but rather you get much more efficient at skipping things you know or recognize as unimportant.
It comes with practice - try reading papers and books, and think about what are the important parts. Learn to identify the 'meat' and which techniques are used. Also, you'll notice that instead of learning 'the stuff', it is about cataloging and storing meta-information about where to find 'the stuff' once you really need it.
After a while, you realize that most of the new papers you read, you only need the gist of it, in order to reference it. Comparably few papers need to be read and understood in paragraph-by-paragraph detail.
As a corollary, over the course of one's career a person would tend to specialize in a specific area within the discipline. The amount of new information in that particular area would be less but the depth of knowledge one would need to possess in that specific area would increase.
to add, I feel that actually writing academic papers also helped me with the aspects mentioned in this answer
Great answer (+1). I particularly like your point that "instead of learning 'the stuff', it is about cataloging and storing meta-information about where to find 'the stuff' once you really need it". That is a crucial skill!
One can think of papers as very extensive stack exchange answers for questions. You don't really need to know every single one of them by heart, but you must know that they exist, you must know how to judge their quality and where to find them if you ever need them again.
(Based on my personal experience:)
On a given, very specific, subject - the rate does diminish; on the overall set of subjects you're concerned with - not so much. Or rather, there are ups and downs.
But the above is in terms of, say, pages, or words. As you learn more, familiarize yourself with patterns in people's work, writing, thought - you catch on faster. If you do achieve mastery of a something, you could get to a position where someone shows you a paper and after a few minutes' thought, if not less, you basically know what it's about, what the implications are and a few likely avenues they have taken to get their results. (But, again in my experience, this happens for some subjects, and in others you may still have the sense of having to part the see every time.)
It is largely up to you. There are academics that become experts in a very specific field. If you take that path, depending on the popularity of that field, there may not be a huge amount of new material that you will need to learn once you have absorbed what there is. So, the rate of learning will diminish considerably once you are "caught up".
However, other academics like to explore and change focus. If you take this path, each time you change focus, you will be like a new PhD student, and have to learn the literature for the new topic. However, as other answers have indicated you will learn to learn faster.
The answer partially depends on what you mean by "Academia". If you are on a research-centered career trajectory then of course you need to keep current in your field (with all of the reading that this involves) as well as perhaps branch out into related fields so you don't become too 1-dimensional.
On the other hand, if you end up in a smaller, teaching-oriented institution, you still need to learn new things -- but what you need to learn changes. I teach in such a place. I have long since given up trying to keep current in the specialty that I studied in graduate school, and I only read a handful of research papers per year. Instead I do things like spend time increasing my knowledge of physics (something I never studied in school) so that I can be more informed when I teach differential equations, learning R programming so that I can become a better stats teacher, sometimes even learning a topic which is brand new to me because I want to teach a course in it (e.g. I knew nothing about cryptography until I developed a course for it). My experience in teaching-based academia is that the depth of the learning that you need to do is greatly reduced compared to graduate school but that the breadth of the learning that you need to do is greatly increased. You might need to move from being a specialist to being fairly eclectic.
You used the word "burden" 9 times in your question. My guess is you are learning at way above your comfortable rate.
Once you finish your PhD, in fact once you get through all the mandatory material, you will have much more control over the rate at which you learn new things. You will also position yourself to do what you are more comfortable doing and learning. Learning will feel much less like a burden that is pushed upon you and more like an interesting activity. This way you may keep or even increase the rate of learning, but greatly reduce the effort required to learn new material.
In Germany (where I am located) there is no mandatory material. You start with research from day 1 in quite an autonomous way.
In my experience as a student of science in junior college, in the first year I had this tendency to memorize everything in my textbook and notes. This method is not sustainable especially for the sciences. In my second year, I started spending much more time on the basics and see if I understood it or not. This method was sustainable as well as studies seemed much less of a burden because your study time boils down to whether you understood the concept or not. If yes, that's great. If not, you refer to other sources to understand it.
As one of my Professors once said:
You are lucky to be young, because when you reach my age, you simply can't learn radically new things!
So, basically, there is a point when the 'burden' becomes unbearable! So, clearly at some point the burden becomes less, as this is nessecary! (at least, for my professor)
However, this is pretty late in your career. As a PhD student, you really have to learn how to organise and manage the information. (But always be clever! The greatest problem solvers (such as Leonhard Euler or Louie Pasteur (I recall reading a nice story by Hamming (yes, from the distance) about Pasteurs' skills)), can find effective solutions while knowing a lot less than experts in the field)
Clearly, being a scholar is more than hoarding information, it is about deciding what is important to remember!
So, when does it get less? When you do less research, really. When the main reason you're getting paid is because you are now a manager and reeling in the grant money.
I don't agree with this quote, I've seen plenty of examples of mathematicians who are not so young and who are still learning new areas (and doing good research in the new areas).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.040266 | 2018-03-22T11:44:06 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/106883",
"authors": [
"Ben",
"Keine",
"Lightness Races in Orbit",
"QCD_IS_GOOD",
"RudyB",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"T. Sar",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12378",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21100",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31639",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32446",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42168",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/60045",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84993",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026",
"littleO",
"reas0n"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
79927 | Should I write a monograph for myself?
My dissertation is going to be a thesis by publication. I am going to publish a couple of papers and put those into one document with a couple of leading words (another 20 pages or so) and this is going to be my thesis. I feel that the monograph I wrote for my master thesis (which was pretty extensive) was actually pretty helpful as a reference now (I am continuing the research on the same topic). Thus I would like to know: Should I write a monograph for myself? Obviously I am not going to publish that, so I won't have all the work with writing it nicely (or at least more nicely than I personally need). My mentor (who is not my doctor father) told me this is too much work and I should rather use that time to publish more. What do you think? I am researching of A.I. and Machine Learning, thus I will have a lot of math and a lot of programming. The monograph I would write would be about the math, not the programming (that should document itself).
The comments seem to misunderstand a couple of things:
My mentor is not my doctor father. My mentor has not say in anything and no involvement - he is just there to give me tips.
There is no question what my thesis will be. It will be a thesis by publication. The monograph would just be for myself.
I cannot "publish a paper based on the thesis": My thesis is going to consist out of multiple (about 6) publications.
Didn’t you write things down nicely in your paper?
Really, this is your call, especially, if your mentor essentially supports a quick solution in the way of dissertation by publication (some don't, they want a book). The monograph is, of course, a learning experience, which may be just the thing you want. But nobody can really answer this question. Writing a monograph is a different animal than a paper; its length imposes totally different way of organising the writing than a paper.
"this is too much work and I should rather use that time to publish more": I agree. Rather, try to see if you can publish a paper based on the thesis.
@Wrzlprmft: No. Paper are written in such a way that they should be understood by themselves. Thus I would simply everything that is not needed for this particular paper. Thus I leave out generalizing stuff. E.g. parameter in formulas that are zero parameter for this particular paper will be left out. E.g. the formula can be weighted with a parameter, but in this paper the weight is always 1, so in this paper we leave the parameter out.
@DSVA: I want to write as little as possible "offical" stuff - that needs correction which is time consuming. Instead i want to write "extra" stuff for myself - that I can write as I see fit.
This question was asked a long time ago, but remains on the unanswered queue, so I'll try to answer.
In math and computer science, generally articles matter more than books, for junior researchers trying to establish themselves. So, the usual advice is to focus time on writing short, high-quality articles that can be published quickly, rather than monographs, until after tenure. Doing a "thesis by publication" is ideal. I essentially did that and was able to put two strong papers on arXiv before I even defended my thesis. Peers of mine who wrote the monograph first, and later tried to extract the articles lost a year on that task, after getting their PhD.
Many authors write a book after a series of papers, to tell a complete story and write things down in a cleaner way, which became clear to them as they published those individual papers.
That said, it's good to check all details carefully even if some of those checking steps are omitted from the articles. And, it's wise to be well-organized and keep notes regarding what's true more generally, nice ways you've found to think about/explain things, etc. That way, when you are ready to write a book, you will have a large collection of notes to draw from. But in terms of the optimal allocation of your time, it's best not to spend time polishing those notes when you could be getting publications. Lastly, realize that the story will become clearer to you as you write those individual papers, shepherd them through the publication pipeline, and give talks on them. So it's more sensible to write a monograph/book after you've done all that learning and honing of your own understanding.
Many years later: I agree with this. Instead of writing a monography which looks and sounds good enough to be published, one should just write for oneself in notes. Those notes can be much shorter and still contain all information. Ideas are not a linear text one's mind, but more like a non-linear map. Writing for publication requires much more time than writing for oneself; these types should not be conflated. Writing for publication also requires a lot of "marketing work"; e.g., making images extra pretty. In my case, the dissertation is a mixture of the published papers and new content.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.040968 | 2016-11-15T13:21:39 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79927",
"authors": [
"Captain Emacs",
"Make42",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Wrzlprmft",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41788",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
140877 | Am I being exploited by my supervisor?
It has been 4.5 years since I joined as a PhD student.
My supervisor asks me to draft almost all of his important emails. He will begin by briefing me the issue, and ask me to draft the email in a document and sent to him. He would ask me to do this even when I am busy doing experiments. Many times I have to leave the experiment in the middle to draft his emails.
He has asked me to correct PhD thesis of three of my seniors. I was asked to correct the thesis for language and technical content. These assignments put me months behind my planned schedule. I guess correcting a thesis for one of the senior would have given me a learning opportunity on how to write a good thesis, editing, formatting, etc. Three theses are, in my opinion, too much. I don't know why he never assigns such works to other students in the research group.
One day he shared some experimental results of another PhD student (who is a junior to me) and asked me to perform statistical analysis on the results and draft a research manuscript. It took me days to complete the analysis and write the manuscript from the scratch. When it was finally ready for submission, I requested him to keep the author sequence as: my junior (first author), me (second author), supervisor (third author). On hearing this he became extremely furious (he keeps himself as the second author in all the research papers), and indirectly warned me that he won't be taking interest in supervising my research. Fearing that my work progress could go haywire, I apologized profusely and I had to literally 'beg' him to forgive me. I made the request for the author sequence because I have seen that professors usually keep the names of students earlier in the author sequence before their own.
I have been devoting 1.5 hours every weekday (Mon to Fri) to tutor his daughter in high-school Mathematics. That takes a precious amount of my time which I'd have instead spent on my research. I politely expressed that this work takes a lot of my time, but he still asked me to continue. I had no choice but to continue.
What I would like to ask here is am I being exploited/abused, or is this what a PhD student is 'normally' expected to do? How is the PhD student and supervisor relationship ideally supposed to be? Since the PhD degree is extremely important for my career, I have been doing everything he has asked. But I don't really want to be a supervisor like him in the future when I will be supervising students working with me. Please share some advice.
Update: The region is South-East Asia.
How much longer do you have? Did his past students succeed in their career? This will inform your further action, independently of the ethically questionable behaviour of your supervisor.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please review this before posting another comment.
This bullshit is one of the main reasons I dropped from academia. It is saddening when a corporate manager has more respect towards your work than your academic supervisor.
"I have been devoting 1.5 hours every weekday (Mon to Fri) to tutor his daughter in high-school Mathematics." - I sincerely hope he is paying you for your time. This is in no way part of your requirements as a PhD student...
"tutor his daughter in high-school Mathematics" This is in-your-face abuse of power.
Obviously, as other answers indicate, yes, your supervisor is exploiting you - plain and simple. But here's a suggestion regarding what you should do about it:
Collect evidence on how you've been exploited/abused:
Emails
Letters
Written documents indicating what you are required to do, but also what you're doing (e.g. if your supervisor's daughter writes you some note)
Screenshots of text message exchanges in which you're given instructions / requests to perform these activities or which otherwise acknowledge them.
Maybe some audio recordings - if you're discreet about it and if that is legal in the state you're in - of your supervisor making inappropriate demands/requests.
The idea is not to have lots and lots of these, but enough to be able to establish it is actually happening in case he denies it; also, a few choice pieces of evidence you can use to illustrate to people how serious this is when you're talking to them, if it's necessary. Recordings are "just in case", not-use-unless-absolutely-necessary type of evidence though.
I don't know what the organizational situation is in SE Asian universities, but consult - discreetly initially - with:
Your junior researchers' union representative - if you're unionized.
Your graduate student union - if you at least have a union as students rather than employees.
Colleagues you can trust and who can attest to your supervisor's behavior
(more risky) members of faculty you can trust; they may be biased against you acting against a Professor, but on the other hand may have effective suggestions for you.
Avoid discussing this matter with people you think would just rat you out to your supervisor.
Based on the advice you got, do one or more of the following:
Lodge a disciplinary complaint against him, or have your union do so in your stead.
(If you're not yet close to concluding your research,) Demand a change of supervisors (better if you have an alternative one lined up) due to abuse.
Have your union threaten your supervisor with action against him if he doesn't change his attitude towards you - disciplinary, legal, public-relations, or other collective disruption.
Get a story in the press (in-university or out-of-university).
Talk to the head of the department/faculty about the situation - preferably not alone but accompanied by supporting-witness colleagues and/or your union representative.
Note: Some of these actions are potentially dangerous, especially if you don't have some colleagues who would speak in your favor, and if your supervisor can get other grad students to deny your claims. So - I'm not recommending anything specific; it depends on the circumstances, the advice you get and the support you have. That being said you should do something, because just laying low and getting your doctoral work done with will mean that your supervisor will find some other poor PhD candidate to lord over.
Colleagues may - even if they are not biased - be unwilling to act against the supervisor. If the university has no official and working mechanism to handle unfair supervisors, this advice is dangerous for OP's career. This statement should be made clear at the very top of the response.
@CaptainEmacs: Items 1 and 2 are not dangerous; and I did explain some actions in item 3 are potentially dangerous. But I'll beef it up a bit.
Some of the suggestions here could also happen after the defense, when the risks are much lower. And we are back to finding out if the defense is likely to happen soon, or if some change (new advisor?) is necessary for that.
@MarcGlisse: Not really. After the defense, OP is essentially no longer around. But good point regarding the change of supervisors.
For audio recordings I would be more worried about legality, not just discreetness. Make sure you're not committing a felony (or equivalent/similar in your jurisdiction) before doing that...
@Mehrdad: Yes, fair point. Some places in the world require all-party consent for recordings, others just one-party consent.
Yes you are.
Point 4 is downright abuse of power. You are not in any way obliged to provide free tuition to your advisor’s child! If your institution has reasonable management, you reporting this would result in severe disciplinary action (I think I would have my tenure clock pushed and have something on my record for something like this). Even if you were paid to do it I’d feel weird about having my students tutoring my kids. Depending on where you are on the planet, not getting paid for tutoring is illegal. Your advisor would be in serious legal trouble if you are in, say, the US or Europe.
Drafting emails seems like an odd practice. It’s abusing power to some extent but if the emails are relevant to your work it might be construed as acceptable by some department heads. That said, you’re a student, not a personal assistant, seems like a waste of your time.
You should not be reading and correcting others' work with no credit, this is the advisor’s job. I would be upset if I were the one of the students who didn’t get their advisor’s feedback!
Being an ass about authorship is another bad sign, though in itself may not be too bad. Disagreements about authorship do occur, though the response you describe seems wildly disproportionate. Getting students to the point where they have to 'beg' for your forgiveness is never okay. His job as an advisor is to educate, teach and advise - you are not his pawn or slave.
Taken together, what you’re describing is a toxic and abusive relationship.
What you can do depends on where you are in the world and your department. Most reasonable universities have ombudspersons or student support centers whose job is to help people in your situation. If no such thing exists you can try to approach your department head or dean.
You need to have clear-cut evidence. Emails, records of your visits to tutor the advisor’s kids, written proof that you corrected the thesis of others (say, an email exchange, files sent to you with request for correction, or any other acknowledgement) etc.
I’m sorry you’re in this situation, hope you get things settled. The tone of your post does not make it sound like you are in severe emotional distress, but of course it's impossible to tell. Make sure you get emotional support through what is undoubtedly a rough experience. You do not deserve this, and you should not feel like this is normal.
"written acknowledgement that you corrected the thesis of others" A copy of the corrections should be sufficient.
That's what I mean - some written proof, even a thank you email, should be enough.
That really won’t work. Putting up preliminary work with others involved online can easily backfire with them accusing you of misconduct. Plus pissing off one’s advisor seldom ends well.
OP has stated in the chat/comments below his question that they ARE getting paid for the tutoring. ~ "He pays a very petty amount and that too irregularly (generally after a gap of 2-3 months). I am not at all interested in tutoring, just following the 'orders'."
Yes, definitely he is using you. Let's break it down one by one.
Point 1: Drafting professors' email is a thing that many Ph.D. students do occasionally. But requiring the student to stop doing the experiment in favor of drafting a personal email is not something a good supervisor does.
Point 2: Can be a legit point. Although doing it all the time is tiresome and time-consuming, the professor can get some benefit of doubt there.
Point 3: It's saddening to even hear that. If you help write a scientific paper (even partially), your name should be in it. Let alone professionalism, this is common courtesy. Your professor is not doing that, and is instead getting furious with you which is much worse than being unprofessional.
Point 4: It's not your job at all. He is abusing you. If you do it happily in your spare time, that's another matter.
And yes, by any yardstick, he is using you.
Point 1: No, drafting professors' email is not a thing that many PhD students do, ever. It sounds like you are in a region where such things happen, but it is simply not right, unless the email is actually part of a collaboration of some sort.
@user21820: Here is a fun fact for you. Let alone email drafting, I saw some of my known PHP students helping the professor in doing grocery marketing on a regular basis. And if you are interested where I am from, I am from South Asia.
It is not a fun fact. It is a disgusting fact. There are also some countries where cheating is the norm, but that doesn't make cheating ethical. I have nothing more to say here.
@user21820: I know that my friend and believe me, the student who does that doesn't like that either. But, it's unfortunate that they have to do those just to keep the professor happy(or, in other words, not to make the professor furious or unhappy about the student, like mentioned in the question) so that they can get their degree without any unnecessary hassle.
I understand that. Indeed, in some cases (where the abuse is mild) it may be best to tolerate it and try to get out as soon as possible. But we should not call such things "fun facts". The point of my first comment was that saying "many students do" is misleading and arguably downplays the abuse.
Depending on where you are and who is your supervisor, his behaviour may or may not be acceptable. In most of modern Asia, it is probably OK. In EU and US, it will be considered abuse in any relation between dependent parties, not only in academia.
Regarding the tuition to your advisor’s child: see, for example, Hippocratic Oath. How exactly this arrangement appeared in your case?
Could you please explain how does the Hippocratic Oath fit here?
Excerpt: ... to consider his family as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they want to learn it, without fee or indenture; ...
I have seen professors using PhD students as their personal assistants in Asia (China, Korea, Japan) but never to that level. I am sure it is abusive behavior in Asia too
@fraxinus ok, that's a quote from the Hippocratic oath, sure. Is OP a Physician?
He didn't mention. Then again, the text has a lot of influence in academia in general.
The Hippocratic oath is only relevant to medical professionals, and we have no reason to think it applies to the OP. More importantly, even if the OP were a medical student, they are still a student so wouldn't have taken the oath yet. In addition, the oath is not really relevant these days and has mostly been replaced by various modern versions. Finally, the quote you mention would be relevant to teaching medicine not tutoring a child in mathematics!
@Patrice My field is Engineering.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.041412 | 2019-11-30T05:15:30 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/140877",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Captain Emacs",
"Jesse",
"Marc Glisse",
"Math1000",
"Null_Space",
"Patrice",
"Saiful Islam",
"Spark",
"T. Sar",
"Taladris",
"cag51",
"einpoklum",
"fraxinus",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100323",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112841",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11523",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116904",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118188",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1201",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15528",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15940",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21226",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21812",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24904",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/60045",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75866",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"terdon",
"user21820",
"user3024069",
"user541686"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
23673 | Approximate time frame to switch to different research area
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
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.
Just curious, is any (empirical) proof of the 10,000-hour rule? I see it quoted a lot, but never backed with hard data.
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.
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.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.043037 | 2014-06-19T14:49:50 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23673",
"authors": [
"Kara1981",
"Piotr Migdal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63285",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63288",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63339",
"jamesa",
"sphinx74"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
19817 | How many manuscripts per day are sent to leading journals?
I wonder how many manuscripts are submitted daily to the top scientific journals, such as Nature or Science. Each of those journals has multiple editors, specialising in narrower fields. The question that follows is how many submittions does one editor handle daily?
Here's how a top 3 economics journal handles it.
I could answer for the leading journal in Algebraic Combinatorics (see http://www.mathoa.org/), but that is probably quite narrow for your taste.
According to Nature's website, they received 10,952 submissions last year, which works out to an average of almost exactly 30 papers per calendar day. Given that there are 26 subject area editors according to their editorial masthead, it would appear that the average editor gets about 8 papers per week, or one or two per day.
However, their caseload is probably much bigger, since they also have to deal with all of their other "open" papers as well—so an editor might have something like 60-100 active papers to deal with at any one time (ballpark estimate, assuming a two- to three-month life cycle—although I suspect it's actually much longer than that if multiple rounds of reviews are required).
It is also worth mentioning that submission rate can vary according to the month and the day of the week, so some days can potentially be much busier.
I have met a subject editor from Nature, she told me that every day she reads between 8-12 papers and that she needs to make a quick decision whether to send it to review or not. So the workload might also change by subject.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.043403 | 2014-04-25T14:57:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19817",
"authors": [
"Benoît Kloeckner",
"Bitwise",
"LYU Yang",
"Lesnar",
"Melih",
"StasK",
"akm",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54115",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54116",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54117",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54125",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6862",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/946",
"user54124"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
20909 | Can literature review be a research paper on its own?
I am thinking about starting a research to publish in a peer reviewed journal. However, I wonder if a literature review is a research paper. For instance, if I wrote a paper about EU-Russia affairs in a form of literature review, would it have a chance to be published?
What do you mean by a "research paper"? If you mean any scholarly publication, then a literature review could certainly count. If you mean original research, then that by definition doesn't include a literature review (which is more of an expository or survey paper).
Literature reviews, often referred to by journals as just "Reviews" can and are their own form of research paper. My very first publication was a review like this, so it's clearly possible.
How viable a paper like that is will probably depend on the conventions of your field. For example, mine generally requires that these "expert reviews" (in contrast to a meta-analysis or systematic review) be solicited by the editor, not cold submitted. That involves shopping your manuscript around a little to see if anyone is willing to "invite" it, having a senior person backing you who can prompt a colleague to invite it, or finding a journal who accepts cold submitted reviews.
That's not the topic I'm going to write. I wan only an example. Thanks for your answer. 'expert reviews' are good idea.
It definitely can. I also think it's a good first move in a PhD, although I had a hard time mapping out a field that I was new to (compared to a person working in the area for years).
I summarized some of the insights I gained from that process in a blog article: http://carl-witt.de/writing-a-literature-review/
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.043576 | 2014-05-13T18:56:25 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20909",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Nikhita Raghunath",
"Reinhard Neuwirth",
"Serhat",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15244",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57077",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57078",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57084",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/60417",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"shivarani",
"user5207497"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
82939 | Is not including a letter of recommendation from all of my research advisors in grad school applications an automatic red flag?
I graduated in 2014, and my situation is that I have been out of school for three years (as of fall 2017 it will be three years). My first recommendation is from an undergraduate research advisor who I've worked with extensively, and who I published with this year, so it's current.
My second is a research advisor from 2015 when I received a fellowship to do to research abroad. He is in a subfield that I want to do my grad research in.
My third is my undergraduate major advisor, who knew me well and who I worked as a TA for for two semesters. We've kept in contact over the years and he's been a real help in helping me receive scholarships/fellowships when he wrote me letters in the past.
My question is this: I had a research experience in the summer of 2014 at a national lab, but I have not asked my advisor there for a letter for most of my schools that only require 3 letters. The research was not in the subfield I'm looking to go into, but it would be the next most recent item on my CV, and more importantly, it would be a research reference. It's not a case of being on bad terms with this person. He is able to write me a strong letter, as I explicitly asked this of him for schools that required a fourth letter (and he easily agreed), but I genuinely think my third letter writer as indicated above is stronger. That professor was instrumental in designing many of the courses in my major department (and so has intimate knowledge of the curriculum and what my grades actually mean in those courses), and is known for writing excellent letters. Additionally, the national lab internship was only for three months, which is a very short amount of time.
I have read on here that omitting such a letter could in some cases be a red flag to admissions committees, especially if it is recent, but I'm wondering if perhaps this case is a bit different. I already have two referees who can speak strongly to my research experience, and they're directly in the subfield I'm interested in. I don't think the other research referee would say anything that these referees have not already touched on, but I do think having the undergraduate advisor, who I've worked for and who has known me for a very long time in an academic context (but non-research context), would be valuable.
What should I do in this case?
Do I need recommendation letters from supervisors if I have a master's?
It is not a requirement that you include letters from every research advisor you've ever worked with as part of your graduate application. Since you already have letters from multiple research advisors, you can choose your third letter accordingly. If you believe the letter from your academic advisor is more helpful to you, then you should continue to use that letter. For example, your third advisor could more helpfully comment on your teaching abilities, if that is something you feel is important in your application.
the short answer to your question is no. The longer answer is that the applications committee will look - holistically at your application including your reference letters. Speaking from the UK context, the recommendation letters do matter but they do not matter as much as you may think. By all means think about whom and how many letters you need but that is not going to prove decisive in your PhD application. Your track record; grades; potential and demonstrated ability for research etc - in my view - matter more.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.043753 | 2017-01-09T19:28:16 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/82939",
"authors": [
"BCLC",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21026"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
36927 | A faculty member turned me down because of lack of funding. If the university announces funding is available, should I apply anyway?
Ten days ago I contacted a professor who conducts research in a field I am deeply interested in, to ask about PhD positions. He replied very politely that he had no funding available to hire a new person in his research group.
Today, the university announced that there is funding available for PhD positions and they welcome applications. In the application I am supposed to choose from a list of supervisors and try to convince them via a motivation letter and without directly contacting them.
Should I put the name of that professor or is it not a good idea? Wouldn't he know that there is some funding coming up soon, to suggest to me to wait a bit or is it possible he didn't know about it? Was he trying to politely say that he is not interested in me? If so, would it be a better idea to choose another supervisor or be persistent?
The "without directly contacting them" makes this tricky. Otherwise, I would suggest contacting the professor again to ask if he would be interested in taking you on if you were able to get funding from the university. That would clarify whether he meant "I want to work with you but don't have funding" or "I don't want to work with you".
Maybe he meant that he didn't have funding to hire you directly. Or perhaps the university funding details are not known to everybody outside of the corresponding committee until they are out. Or even he was just oblivious to the existence of this.
There is no way to know without specifics, and there is little risk in just applying.
You should list that professor on your letter and at least go down with your guns blazing. He at least knows your name and has interacted with you enough that he would choose to look more closely at your application now.
You can only take his earlier statements about lack of funding at face value. Also remember that not all of us are fortunate enough to charm the socks off every person we meet upon first meeting them. This professor may be someone who needs to warm up to people. At the very least, he is likely to respect you for your persistence in reaching out to him again in this way.
What is relevant here is that this professor conducts research in a field you said you are DEEPLY INTERESTED in. List this professor as your desired supervisor.
There may also be the possibility this professor may decline to be your supervisor, for reasons that have little to do with you, and may instead refer your application to another professor, who winds up becoming your supervisor. If he did such a thing, it would probably be based on his expert knowledge of the situation, and that would be a good thing for you.
Faint heart never won fair lady. Forget the overthinking, analytical stuff here and if you are going to go down, going after something you want, make sure it is with both guns blazing. List this professor as your desired supervisor.
Good Luck.
Well, there are two possibilities:
The professor has no funding available to hire a new person in his research group
The professor is trying to politely say that he is not interested in you
It seems like in either of those cases, you should choose another supervisor. It sounds like he doesn't want you, so if you apply to the university intending to work with him, you'll probably get rejected.
Why is the first possibility a problem? Professor does not have funding, student finds funding through university scholarship, problem solved. I see this happening quite often and I would send a second mail to inform the professor about the other source of funding and whether it is OK to apply.
@o4tlulz: It depends a lot on the school, how easy it is to get funding through teaching assistantships, whether students in your department are guaranteed funding, etc. It can be more of a pain in the butt to work with a professor who doesn't have funding because you might have to TA more.
@BenBitdiddle you cannot know that from his answer without asking more. If the OP is very interested in the area, it is definitely worth trying (or asking further).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.044045 | 2015-01-16T21:22:31 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/36927",
"authors": [
"Ben Bitdiddle",
"Byrrell",
"DaveIdito",
"Davidmh",
"GoneAway",
"Ixxra",
"LeakTom",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Shrestha Ghosh",
"XPerianer",
"creepy_silence",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100419",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100420",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100421",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100422",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100430",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100458",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100459",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24384",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6978",
"o4tlulz"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
60536 | Applying for three PhD programs at the same school
I found three phd programs in one school. The programs and areas of research are close to each other and also close to my interests and I am interested in studying in any of the programs. I contacted some faculty members and they encouraged me to apply.These programs have shared faculty members. In addition, applying for more than one program does not have additional fees.
I applied for programs a and b. I am wondering to apply for c phd program or not. Does applying for three programs have a negative effect on my admission chances? Applying for three programs means writing three SOPs to be read by a small group of professors.
I remember asking a similar question to one of our faculty members, he replied You know, academia is a small world. He probably meant there is a high chance that the other faculty will know who had applied to their peers. Will it create a negative impact? I guess that depends on the person whom you apply.
There is nothing to hide. At least one professor knows I am applying for more than one program. I do not know their attitude toward applying for three programs.
Possible duplicate of Does applying for a Masters at a school when also applying for a PhD look bad?
@ThePompitousofLove I must say that your definition of a duplicate is rather notorious.
@ThePompitousofLove Not even close to a duplicate
This answer is coming very late, but may be useful to people who land up on this thread.
If all the three departments have faculty and research which are aligned with your research goals, there is no harm in applying to all 3 programs. The graduate committee is made of professors who are very well aware of the fact that almost all phd applicants apply to multiple phd programmes, the difference here is that they know where 2 other applications of yours went. They may ask you to set a priority, that's all. Showing interest is different from receiving an offer, professors may be interested in multiple candidates, but due to constraints give out offers to a smaller pool. They should not hold anything against you. If they do, you are better off not joining that programme.
I applied to 3 phd programmes in the same university, and got selected in my second choice. All 3 departments knew that I had applied to the other 2 as well. They had no issues with it.
When the programs you are planning to apply to have overlaps in the faculty belonging to them, it's not necessarily helpful to apply to multiple programs simultaneously. This suggests that you either don't really know what you're interested in or are trying to maximize your chances by applying to multiple programs and hoping that the admissions committees don't notice.
However, if different faculty encouraged you to apply to each of the three programs, that's something else altogether. Then you might consider mentioning which faculty encouraged you to apply to specific programs in your letters of purpose for each program. But otherwise, I'd apply to your preferred program.
If the different programs are in the same department, or the institution is small, applying to many programs will not reflect well on your prospects to be a successful PhD student. Doctoral study often involves intense, sustained focus on a single study; applying to three programs may be seen as an indication that you lack that focus!
It depends on how graduate applications are handled at the institution you are applying to. Does the graduate school/graduate Dean look at applicants before the programs do? Does a department with multiple PhD programs look at applicants at the department or program level? If grad applicants are reviewed at the level of the College then surely it will be noticed that you're taking a "shotgun" approach to applications, which may be interpreted negatively. It all depends on how many, and how strong, the firewalls between programs are.
At a big institution you will probably be OK. At a small one, no way!
For what it is worth, at my institution (a moderate sized, 14,000 student second tier state institution with doctoral programs) we would probably notice a student applying to 3 doctoral programs.
If you want to figure out how graduate applications are handled you can probably figure it out through institutional handbooks, bylaws, minutes, etc. But that would be work (mostly) wasted... Put together a strong application package!
There are several reasons why you might WANT to apply for all three programs:
You have not already contacted faculty to be your mentor.
The GPA, GRE, etc requirements are radically different
Faculty overlap is minimal
If you are interested in a particular faculty (and the requirements of the programs are the same), I would contact that faculty member and start the conversation. I would ask that faculty member if they suggest one program over another (they may know more about the funding situation, number of applicants this year, etc).
I would ask that faculty member if they suggest one program over another. I don't think that's a good idea. If I were a faculty and in need of a PhD applicant, I would think to myself Why don't you figure out yourself? and won't reply at all.
I disagree. If you are already in conversation with a faculty member, and they've already expressed interest in you (or even more so, offered you a position), I think it is a fair question. I was looking at 3 programs for my PhD, and already found a mentor. He told that 1 program was not accepting students (they were accepting applications), and suggested applying to a different one.
However, as I said, if the faculty and funding situations are similar in all programs, there is no likely added benefit except perhaps number of applicants. That might be a good question to ask the departments.
Did your newly found mentor encouraged you to apply other programs? Did he/she actually agree to take you as his/her student? IMO, I find it rather rare if not obscure.
I don't disagree that it is probably rare to have faculty encourage a student to apply to a different program. I've only heard of a few cases. But I know quite a few students who had a mentor agree to take them as students before applying, and there are programs in my field where you need a mentor's ok to even apply. It could be a difference in field, as I'm in biomedical sciences. But if a faculty is associated with 2-4 programs, I still don't think it's rude to ask if there is one they prefer (if it's a solid opportunity, which the OP made it sound like may NOT be the case).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.044415 | 2015-12-23T07:16:50 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60536",
"authors": [
"Anatomy_Princess",
"BigMistake",
"Decoy spammer",
"Gaius Augustus",
"George",
"Hamideh",
"Matija8",
"Sathyam",
"The Pompitous of Love",
"aldrichsteve",
"amye1326",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167588",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167724",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167783",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/175434",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24064",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28812",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35384",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35830",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36807",
"xingchen.sky",
"宋天一"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
68820 | Advisor associated with the U.S. Army want their name removed from the text of a published article
I have been contacted by an individual with a request to remove their name from an article our journal published two years ago. The individual was identified as a Culture and Foreign Language Advisor of the U.S. Army; their post location (city) was also mentioned. This person claims that the author of this article did not asked their permission to include their name in the article, and did not give informed consent to do so.
Is this a valid request? I mean, it may be valid ethically as it may put this person and their relatives at risk, by associating their name with a military program, but since two years have passed since publication and our journal is open-access, this article has been archived on a number of other sites we do not control. So, the info is already out there, no matter how we proceed. Do you think this is also a legal problem? (The journal is located in Central Europe)
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because #2 is probably out of scope here since it asks for a legal determination. Even if we could answer it, your remedy probably lies in a lawsuit about which we could not advise you.
So... do you have a signed copyright transfer agreement from this person? If yes, then the author can't very well claim that he was never asked whether he wanted to appear on the paper. Plus, many journals explicitly have prospective authors sign a document agreeing to publication, regardless of copyright transfer. Conversely, if you do not have such a copyright transfer document signed by the author, I don't understand what your point 2 is there for. Voting to close as "unclear what you are asking."
Wait, does their person want their named removed as an author of the article, or does their name appear in the article in which they were not an author, and they want that appearance removed?
If @PeteL.Clark's question is relevant and right, they probably don't have the right to have their name removed from mention in the article in the US. There might be some issues of research ethics that need addressing at the main author's institution, but I don't think there's a crime or tort in mentioning facts about a person in a journal article if no other law has been violated. Can you clarify?
I have heard of this before, and usually (but not always) it stems from an (over)abundance of caution, or an inflated ego. What I would do is ask the officer to have his JAG write up a request on the JAGs letterhead. If the JAG does it, you will have a lot of cover to do whatever you need to do. More likely is he will be to embarrassed to ask the JAG, and if not, the JAG will tell him it isn't worth worrying about.
Just for clarification: the individual in question is not listed as an author. Their name appear in the main text of the article, and they want that appearance removed, but they are not listed as an author.
Is "Culture and Foreign Language Advisor of the U.S. Army" a fancy way to say "spy"?
Would the EU court's finding of a 'right to be forgotten' have a bearing on this situation? Is the person mentioned a public figure that the article discusses?
@HunSoc Clarifications should be edited directly into the question (partly because comments are ephemeral, partly because then people don't have to read the comments when they come to the question).
@FedericoPoloni If Robert Ludlum has taught me anything, probably yes :P
@ThePompitousofLove As a sample size of one, I can confirm that we were requested not to be overly public about our employment back when I worked for the Air Force (of course it doesn't matter now, as I don't work there anymore.) We were told to remember not to wear our ID badges while off-base and not to list our employment on social media, for example. Certainly, having this published in a paper would have been discouraged.
@FedericoPoloni It is almost assuredly means a member of the Foreign Area Officer program who are not spies, in any traditional sense of the word. They are just meant to be people who know the area (region) and at least one language in the region.
@reirab everything you say is true, but I don't think that Force Protection principles apply here. The article was printed 2+ years ago, and the soldier was probably not in his position by the time it went to press, let alone now. The question now, seems to be, who said or wrote something they shouldn't have? Going to the JAG will help sort that out. If the soldier was in the right, the JAG will certainly defend him, and the Journal needs to take action, and possibly the authors University. Otherwise, the soldier just has to learn to live with the fact that he said something he shouldn't have.
@reirab The point I was trying to make above is that frequently, soldiers will think that it's a big deal, when it really isn't. The JAG will also help them sort this out. If a soldier is really concerned about having their name in what is in all probability a less red journal, the JAG will probably tell them it's not a big deal, and not worth their time. On the other hand, if it is a big deal the JAG will help them sort it out, and having letters from the JAG will make it easier for the editor to deal with the problem.
This seems like an unreasonable request to me. The copyright to the text rests with the publisher, and the "moral rights" with the authors of the paper. I don't think anyone who is mentioned in the article has a legal right to request removal from the article. Certainly, this would morally require consent from the authors.
In general, I do not think that there is a legal right to not have one's name mentioned unless that violates state secrecy rights (think, the name "Valerie Plame" appearing in newspaper articles about the CIA). If the local newspaper mentioned my name in the context of the local cycling club, then this seems to me to be a fair use of their journalistic priviledge that I can not reasonably challenge.
Perhaps this is a comment on semantics but almost everyone has a legal right to request almost anything from everybody. Certainly the army officer can legally request his/her name be removed. However,j I don't think the authors have a legal obligation to in any way act upon the request - not even to acknowledge it.
@emory, there's a big difference in having the right to ask and having the right to be removed. The latter doesn't appear to exist in any jurisdiction I'm aware of.
@emory -- I think we agree that that's semantics. You have the right to demand. But you don't have the right to expect that the other side complies.
It seems pretty clear that naming someone as an advisor to the U.S. Army falls much closer to the 'Valerie Plame' situation than to the 'member of a local cycling club' situation. You may not have a legal obligation to remove the information, but you certainly could have a moral one in some situations. And, in those situations, no, you certainly should not have to get the consent of the author who violated the person's privacy (and potentially, their safety) without their permission (you should probably tell the author, but you wouldn't need their consent in that case.)
@BillBarth: "the right to be removed. The latter doesn't appear to exist in any jurisdiction I'm aware of." - it appears this right does exist in Germany (source only in German); in case of a dispute, a per-case decision has to be made on whether the personality rights or the public interest in disclosure are more important.
@O.R.Mapper, clearly a jurisdiction I wasn't aware of, then. Thanks for the update.
@reirab To continue something that I said to you above, the Valerie Plame situation is exactly what this editor should avoid. Ms. Plame worked for the CIA, but was not a covert operative and therefore was not subject to the protections under the law. She may not have liked having her name associated with the CIA, but the journals or newspapers that publish it had no obligation to protect her, and she wasn't at any physical risk, either. She made a big stink about it, and succeeded in getting investigation, and that was what brought down Scooter Libby, but not the actual leak itself.
It is not clear on what basis the individual in question is asking for his name to be removed from a paper written by other people. Assuming your Central European country has freedom of speech protections more or less similar to the U.S. and Western Europe, people generally can't go around telling other people what to write or publish. Even information that potentially puts military personnel at risk is frequently published in newspapers when there are compelling reasons to do so. And in any case, given what you've told us it's impossible to estimate how credible the claim of putting this person at risk is.
So, when you ask if this is a "valid request", I would say yes, but only in the sense that he has a right to request that you remove his name; and you have a right to refuse. At least this is my not-completely-conclusive impression given the somewhat vague information you've provided.
Now, if you want to be extra nice and comply with the request, ethically speaking (and possibly legally speaking) you would probably have to get permission from the authors of the paper. As an author, I would be very upset if a journal editor decided to change the content of a paper I published without getting explicit approval from me.
As a practical matter, it is impossible to meaningfully comply with the request. Are we going to assume that all ISIS subscribers are going to send in their old journals for the names to be redacted. As a legal matter, if the officer's identity was a state secret, redaction would be legally required. If the publisher did not feel they could change the content of your paper, they would have to redact the entire paper. Your approval implicit or explicit would be unnecessary.
There's probably nothing to be done here in the US, but I'd check with your journal's in house or general counsel. If the authors have stated true facts about a real person that they obtained through legal means, then they and you are probably in the clear. I'm not a lawyer or your lawyer, but in the US, the publication of facts is pretty liberally allowed by law.
As a courtesy to the Army guy, you might ask the authors to submit a revised version that removes his name, but you probably have a First Amendment right not to go down that slippery slope if you want to stand on principles.
Note that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, like the rest of that document, has zero applicability outside the U.S.A.
@DavidRicherby he never said that he was referring to the U.S. Constitution. Other countries can also have first amendments of their own...
@DavidRicherby, which is why my answer is labeled "US" as much as possible. The OP can feel free to ignore it if they aren't associated with any US entities at their own leisure. There seems to be some US-iness to it since the offended person is a US Army service member or is identified as such.
@DanRomik: The term first amendment itself is pretty much meaningless without the U.S. constitution context. But even when considering equivalent constitutional laws from other jurisdictions, different countries may place different relative weight on the freedom of speech vs. individual personality rights such as the right to control usage of one's name.
@O.R.Mapper thanks, I was being sarcastic. I agree that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is the most famous first amendment.
@DanRomik: It is generally not a good idea to attempt sarcasm on the Internet, since sarcasm only works if the recipient knows you well enough to have some reason to believe that you did not sincerely mean what you said. Or, to misquote a famous cartoon: on the Internet, nobody knows you're not an idiot.
@DavidRicherby The US Constitution has universal jurisdiction.
@IlmariKaronen thanks for the recommendation (he said sarcastically)
If this person was interviewed and was aware they were being interviewed then it's safe to assume that choosing to provide information was an agreement for it to be published unless explicitly requesting anonymity or for certain things not to be repeated.But yes there is potential for legal trouble because military bodies are not always fair and rational and have ties with top people in other governments. However it is unlikely. Your only option is to omit any street addresses and names identifying this person individually and then tell them that it won't change the fact that the information remains unchanged and untouchable in the www.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.044946 | 2016-05-16T17:49:34 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/68820",
"authors": [
"BRIONES LUTCHIE A",
"Bill Barth",
"Dan Romik",
"David Richerby",
"Federico Poloni",
"HunSoc",
"Ilmari Karonen",
"KRyan",
"Kharanshu Solanki",
"Ms. Stephanie Maeah",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Pavithra Pavi",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Phil Miller",
"Profile Spam Account",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"Suuz",
"TNO2003",
"The Pompitous of Love",
"Venetian Blinds",
"Vui Nguyen Van",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"aiku wang",
"barkbark",
"emory",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10646",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12999",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194264",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194266",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194290",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194292",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194293",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194294",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194297",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194298",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194303",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194402",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21987",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31208",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35830",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/496",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6814",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"jpmc26",
"reirab"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
28462 | Why would a security agency distribute research funds?
I was reading this excellent paper by Alexander Berkovich and Will Jagy.
And at the very bottom of the very first page it says:
The first author was supported in part by NSA grant H98230-09-1-0051.
(The NSA is the US National Security Agency.)
What does this mean? What does a security agency have to do with distributing funds?
I find this question very unclear. I can't tell what you are asking. It seems to me it is clear what that sentence means. What is the nature of your confusion? Please edit the question to include what you are confused about. Please don't just leave clarifications in the comment thread; edit your question. Comments exist only to help you improve your question.
Because security is a research discipline.
It should go without saying that just because they received NSA funding doesn't mean they are spies. Just as I can receive WWF funding without becoming a panda.
Let me just add a bit more context as a pure mathematician previously funded by the NSA, and in particular, respond to the question "What does a security agency has to do with distributing funds?" The first point is, they actually farm out most of the decision making to the American Mathematical Society (as described here). That still raises the question of why policy makers think routing the money through the NSA makes sense in the first place. The cynic in me points out that though lots of this research could easily be funded through civilian agencies (for example, NSF), it's a lot easier to pass "defense spending" through congress, and you get fewer questions from ignorant congressmen who like to make fun of grants based on their titles.
On the other hand, that still requires somebody in the NSA thinking that requesting this funding is worthwhile. My reading (this is not based on any detailed knowledge of policy makers' thoughts, just general supposition) is this: the NSA is the largest employer of mathematicians in the world, much larger than any university or scholarly society. You would get an even more impressive number if you included other branches of the US Department of Defense, and contractors like IDA. They thus have a vested interest in making sure more Americans get advanced mathematical training (a lot of their jobs are in practice only open to US citizens, due to security clearances), and keep in mind the possibility of working for the NSA.
Giving grants to mathematicians is probably an inefficient method for this (some of the money goes to graduate students directly as salary or travel funding, some to universities as overhead, encouraging them to keep professors on their staff and run graduate programs), but it's also very cheap in the grand scheme of things. I'm sure they also do occasionally benefit from the mathematical results (while they have a reasonably broad program, they don't give grants in all areas of math).
There's also tons of other grants coming from the DOD: DARPA, the Army, Navy and Air Force all have their own research offices, and the DOD has its own graduate fellowship program. In all cases, some of the research is directly connected to military needs, but quite a bit is just predicated on the idea that a strong a well-trained pool of scientists can be very important for national defense. I think ultimately, this grew out the experience of World War II (and the Cold War) where this was undisputedly the case.
As noted, the NSA is the US National Security Agency. This department issues federal grants in the areas of information security, foreign language training for Americans, and mathematical sciences (algebra, discrete mathematics, number theory, probability and statistics). These grants are highly sought after,and like all federal grants, require rigorous preparation. The authors of the paper which you read were successful applicants for a grant from the NSA.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.046038 | 2014-09-13T12:20:03 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28462",
"authors": [
"D.W.",
"JeffE",
"RoboKaren",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/705"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
34423 | Is it sensible to do two PhD's simultaneously?
I have finished my master's degree in Physics (Radiation and Health Physics Option) with distinction, but I want a PhD in Medical Physics. My university does not offer that pathway and other universities are insisting I do a M.Phil. for a year before they will consider me for PhD candidacy I really do not have the energy and time to concentrate on the M.Phil. right now and I fear I might not make the desired grade.
I have an offer to do a Ph.D. in my area of specialization (Radiation and Health) and I need to make a decision on this. I am thinking of accepting both offers and in case I don't get the desired grade to move over to PhD in medical physics, so I can still have my PhD in Radiation and Health Physics and not lose both ways.
Obtaining a PhD is mainly proof that you are capable of doing independent research. There is little to no value in doing two of them, especially in such related fields. Doing 1 PhD with a focus on interdisciplinary collaborations would be much more beneficial.
Erm... What "both offers"? What you wrote literally reads as you cannot enroll into a PhD in Medical Physics unless you pass M.Phil, which you haven't even started yet, so where does this second offer come from?
You do realise that doing a PhD is a full-time job, don't you?
related (not quite a duplicate) Is doing two PHDs a good path?
"Is it sensible to do two PhD's simultaneously" No, Just no.
It sounds like you have offers from two different universities in two slightly different fields. If so, you will need to check with both universities to see if you can be simultaneously enrolled. My guess is that neither university will be happy about that, and especially the one that is providing a studentship. Even if it is allowed, you have to ask yourself what the advantage is.
A PhD is more about the research than the nominal department (or even university) that grants the degree. A PhD is all about gaining the skills needed to do independent research. Sometimes (maybe) a good way (or potentially the only way) of gaining those skills is to do two PhDs. More often a PhD with multiple supervisors will give you the necessary opportunities.
It sounds like for you that you want to start the first PhD and then switch to the second Phd if you do well enough in the MPhil year. While this provides some security, if the first PhD program is such a bad fit (either in terms of reputation or area of study) that you want that type of security, then the program is probably not a good fit for you.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.046382 | 2014-12-17T10:04:40 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34423",
"authors": [
"Alexandros",
"Andra Gherghiceanu",
"Cape Code",
"Jessica B",
"Marc Claesen",
"Sara",
"Tony L.",
"doraanita",
"fedja",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10042",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7173",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94386",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94387",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94388",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94393",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94395",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94396",
"sembuk",
"user94393"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
200974 | Changing academic e-mail in a painless way
I'm leaving university soon and the academic email address I've been providing in my research papers and academic contacts to reach me will be deactivated by the end of November.
What action should I undertake not to lose them?
Not really an answer, but check whether your institution will forward email, either permanently or for some (long) period of time.
@BobBrown They told me, they won't forward anything as they will permanently delete it...
LinkedIn can be helpful here. Also, it's amazing how little you will need to contact most people!
Are you a student or are you faculty?
Get an ORCID ID if you plan on staying in academia, and use it in future academic publications. Then people can find you even if you switch institutions, change your name, or leave academia altogether - just update your contact details at orcid,org.
@JosephDoggie Have it :)
@ScottSeidman PhD student, finishing in November
@StephanKolassa Got ORCiD. It's indeed good idea... Though, maybe it would be also smart to have professional e-mail for academic stuff as I presume to change academia quite often! :)
It's becoming more common and accepted for academics to refer to a personal email account like a gmail for all correspondence, then this problem never arises.
Based on Buffy's answer and the comments, I still think you should try to make forwarding a policy.
Assuming that isn't going work; right now download all of your email and extract the addresses of those with whom you've corresponded. At least, you'll be able to contact them in the future.
Add a .sig to your email saying, "I'll be leaving this address soon. My personal website, https://example.com, has contact information."
If you don't have a "permanent" email address, get one. Gmail is free, and paid addresses are not expensive. Begin referring people to that address right now.
I am going to do that immediately and turn on forwarding. I would eventually go for paid address - can you recommend me something?
@farmaceut I've been very satisfied with Fastmail, but check whether a suitable Gmail address might be available. There's also Outlook.com and mac.com if you're part of the Appleverse.
Yeah, I could either create gmail or use iCloud one, although was considering something more professional and actually permanent so I wouldn't stick with each and every academic e-mail I might be provided with in the ~academic career~
@farmaceut If you have your own domain for your web page, Fastmail (and others) will host your email using your own domain name. That said, I don't see anything unprofessional about gmail; just don't be [email protected].
@farmaceut A decent number of people in my field use gmail for work emails also, and it's becoming more common. See also: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/55413/19607 (from 8 years ago, when it was even less common)
@BobBrown I run my site on .github.io, but unfortunately it doesn't provide an email address. I will consider gmail or icloud.
My supervisor is an associate professor and has started using gmail for a lot of work emails, I think he even puts it as his contact address on most of his articles.
What you are experiencing is a common issue, and I don't know why there's no standard solution. Every time you move up the academic ladder, a new email address and lots of people who need to find a way to contact you.
I know this does not help you now, but the preventive measure is to use a personal email address for all correspondence, e.g. a Gmail account. Every year this seems to be more common.
Since you already have your institution's email listed, the best thing to do is to make sure that your personal website is easy to find through Google, and that your new email address is listed there. I know, that's not easy for J. Smith, A. Kim, and P. Rodriguez, but might be a solution if your name is uncommon. Even if your name is common, make sure that the text of the website includes lots of keywords related to your research, to help those looking for you. If your new institution provides space for personal/research webpages, make sure to use it, as these are ranked high by Google, as opposed to some @wordpress site. Also make sure to keep an active profile in academic social media sites like Researchgate, and even on sites like LinkedIn. That way, people can find you quickly.
I hate anything smelling of social media, and don't want to be served ads while reading email. When you use commercial "free" services, you are at the mercy of the company changing their terms. So my own solution has been to pay for my own domain and email address. The cost is <$40/year and gives me a permanent email address that I control. I find it's worth it.
Last, it used to be the thing that people would send email messages with "I've changed my email, please update your address book." These were sent to their whole email address book. I can't speak about the effectiveness of this approach, but since social media took over, I've been receiving less of that type of message.
But if you email everybody in your address book this please use BCC instead of CC.
Your university may be willing to extend the life of your address upon request. They might also be willing to forward any mail to that address to another that you specify. I suggest that you ask and if they agree, provide them with an address that you control, perhaps gmail (not an endorsement).
Otherwise it is pretty difficult. Over time you can do things to make yourself visible (personal web page, for example) and update your address individually with your contacts.
Ask co-authors to forward mails to your permanent address when inquiries about your joint papers are made. Update editors on any email changes so that enquiries to a journal might (just possibly) come to you.
If you are "corresponding author" on a paper, use an email address that will endure.
But I also encourage universities to help students, especially graduate students, to remain visible through old email addresses. My own (former) university has done this to (at least) some extent. If yours doesn't, then perhaps you can convince the faculty there to demand it.
At one time Dartmouth College promised to make all student email addresses endure forever. I thought at the time that this was a brilliant move for purposes of maintaining contact with alums if nothing else. I don't know if that policy is still in place.
As I replied to the colleague above - they are not willing to do so.
I have a personal website but it is not visible in the research papers so readers won't be able to track the e-mail unless they are aware of the website.
@farmaceut Ask again about forwarding, especially if you have a good rapport with someone in information systems. Also ask your faculty senator; maybe you can get the policy changed as Buffy has suggested. Forwarding of email is very cheap, and there's no good reason not to do it.
@BobBrown I know it's not problematic to set forwarding but they won't.
@farmaceut I understand. Complain to your faculty senator. Explain why this is a problem for everyone on the faculty. Even if it doesn't do you any good, it might help someone in the future.
Prevent this situation
This will not help you today, but it might help another person in the future:
Get your own domain name and hosting service.
Create an email address for your domain.
Create a web page for your domain that lists your contact information.
Always use your own email address to send emails instead of the one your employer provides.
Forward your institutional emails to your personal address. They may refuse to forward after you leave, but in my experience they will forward emails while you work there.
This looks more professional/official than a Gmail account.
I have used this method for many years with several institutions. I have never needed to update any accounts with third party websites or tell anyone my email address has changed. I have never lost emails because the institution removed my account.
Refusing to use my institutional email address has never caused me any real problems. I do occasionally get confused questions about it, including questions from people who do not understand where domain names come from.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.046671 | 2023-08-22T12:34:12 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/200974",
"authors": [
"Bob Brown",
"JosephDoggie",
"Kimball",
"Scott Seidman",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"Tim",
"Tom",
"farmaceut",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112206",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16183",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/174565",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20457",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/92334"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
121166 | What's wrong with my e-mail to potential PhD supervisors?
I recently sent some e-mails to potential supervisors asking information for a PhD with them, I obtained no answers. I share my doubts and then copy the standard mail I sent.
I sent it to 5 different professors in different universities, is the sample too small to expect some answers? I know professors are flooded with e-mails so it could be normal not receiving answers.
Can you point out something I did wrong in my email such as: too long, too short, harsh, too many details, not many details, grammar mistakes (I'm not a native speaker), anything, to help me improve for future e-mails?
How do I have to take these silences? Should I solicit an answer or simply accept that they are not interested in answering?
I sent them on a sunday night, is this a bad moment to send such e-mails? if it is what are the best days and time to send them?
Feel free to give me any kind of advice you think could be helpful.
Here's a copy of my e-mail
Dear professor XXX,
I'm a student of XXX at the university of XXX thinking about applying for PhD in FIELD X, therefore your group at the university of YYY attracted my attention.
I'd like to ask two questions about the possibility of being admitted at your university:
1) Is there a good chance your group is going to look for PhD students in 2019/2020?
2) Is the topic of the master's degree thesis fundamental for a strong application? For example, what are the chances that a student with a thesis in TOPIC Y would have his application taken very seriously into consideration by a group like yours?
This is a very important question for me as it will have a great impact in my application strategy and maybe in the selection of the advisor for the thesis.
Thank you in advance for your time and help if you decide to answer me.
Best regards,
ZZZZ
Addendum 1: as suggested by iayork I have to be more precise and state that I'm European writing to professor in Europe and that I wasn't trying to bypass the application system by writing to them but instead following. As suggested I share the example of a professor I didn't write to:
https://www.ics.uzh.ch/~jyoo/home.htm
In the section jobs he says he has to be contacted for information by possible PhD students. Another example from a university I didn't write to: http://www.en.physik.lmu.de/promotion/berechtigung/index.html
The point 1 is to find an advisor getting in touch with him/her
Addendum 2: Since it's creating a bit of confusion I have to precise that Topic Y in the letter is far from the research interests of the group contacted, I should have been more explicit in the mail and here explaining that the point of that question was to know if I had a chance even with such a thesis, and in case of negative answer I would change my master thesis advisor and topic to produce a thesis that allows me to have a chance to be taken in consideration by the group.
Thank you in advance for any help.
I recommend not ending you email with "Run Like Hell" ;)
@chessofnerd You think they may have followed the advice and that's why they didn't answer? :)
how long haven't you heard from them? Does your current PI knows any of them? Have you ever met with them face-to-face?
Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38237/how-does-the-admissions-process-work-for-ph-d-programs-in-the-us-particularly
@aaaaaa I didn't hear from them since a week and 4 days, I sent a couple of other e-mails on this sunday so for them it's just 4 days, but I didn't consider this last group. What does PI mean? I've never met them in person
4 days is a short period for people to respond in academia. PI=principal investigator, someone you've done research before
@aaaaaa I didn't consider this last group of people that didn't answer in 4 days. Still, about the other group: one week and 4 days is still a short period and I should have waited more before asking this question?
Sorry to be abrupt but the email is funny: it talks about chances as if getting into a lab was a draw at some lottery. I habitually ignore such generic emails.
@chessofnerd "ZZZZ" is much better, it will only make them sleep shortly, afterwards they can answer. And it seems to have invited user "aaaaaa" here to balance the alphabetical distribution of names.
The statements
what are the chances that a student with a thesis in TOPIC Y would have his application taken very seriously into consideration by a group like yours?
and
it will have a great impact in (sic) my application strategy and maybe in the selection of the advisor for the thesis
tell me you are not specifically interested in applying here.
Are you interested in working with this prof or just shopping around? Giving general application advice to strangers isn't high on the list of the average professor's priorities.
(My direct experience is with German and Austrian universities. Programms with centralized admissions are becoming more frequent in continental Europe as well, but in general professors have more leeway here over whom to hire or take on as PhD students than in the US.)
Thanks for the answer, why does that tell you I'm not interested in applying there? If they answer saying that a thesis in Topic Y would never be considered by them I would pick a topic closer to their research interests, should i write that in the mail?. The second point is the same reflects that since I'd choose a different advisor if they tell me they'd prefer a thesis about a different topic, should i be more explicit about that and cut the part about the application strategy? Also could you address point 1, 3, and 4, since they are pretty general they could help me a lot in the future.
You have to read between the lines in your message to actually understand that it's an application (or some kind of pre-application inquiry). Put this upfront. Tell them you want to work with them (or the institution or the group) and why, and leave the rest for when they get back to you. You should ask questions about application strategies to your current BA supervisor or browse this site.
So I'd cut the second part and expand the first part where I tell them about my wish to work with them, thank you.
@Runlikehell also tell them why you are a good fit, i.e. why you picked them and why they should pick you.
@Runlikehell also clarify that your master's thesis was on TOPIC Y instead of generalizing to "a student". Reading your mail I couldn't understand if you had actually done a master's thesis on the subject or were considering it for the future.
@terdon I have not been very clear, I recognize it. The main point is that I were considering a thesis on topic Y, but if they told me such a student with such a thesis would never be taken in their group I would change the topic of my thesis and my advisor to have a chance to work with them.
@Runlikehell yeah, that's the sort of thing you need to clarify. As is the fact that you haven't yet finished your masters so aren't actually considering applying now.
To me, it reads like "If I do a thesis on topic Y, will that guarantee me a place on your PhD program" - which is so naïve that it's hardly surprising the email went straight into the recycle bin.
@alephzero I think it was easy to draw the opposite conclusion since topic Y is far from what they work on. It would have been absurd to think that I thought topic Y could guarantee me a place in their PhD, or that I was asking that. It was more like "If i do a thesis on topic Y, would that be so bad you would never take me into consideration?"
A cursory reading makes it sound as if you'll choose your PHD thesis supervisor, but you are talking about your master thesis supervisor. (I understand that's why henning emphasized it and thought it sounds like "shopping around".)
@Peter A. Schneider that's indeed how I read it.
@PeterA.Schneider Yeah, I was talking about the master supervisor, I had to be precise cause if almost everyone understands the opposite I must have phrase it very poorly, my bad.
[This answer is relevant mainly for North American universities. In other systems, professors may be more easily able to staff their own labs without requiring admission beforehand.]
For many universities, this letter is pointless and the professor can't offer any useful or helpful advice. In the US and Canada (and probably elsewhere but I'm familiar with those) students are admitted, not to a professor's group, but to the overall departmental pool of graduate students. After admission, the students are expected to identify faculty with whom to do their PhDs.
Individual professors typically have nothing to do with the admissions process. They can't promise admission, they don't know who will be admitted, they can't bypass the normal admissions process, and therefore they can't make any statements about openings in their groups.
No matter how compelling your letter to them is, it's a waste of your time and theirs. The only answer they can give you is, "Go through the usual admission process, and if you're admitted we can talk then."
Typically professors with any kind of profile will get literally dozens of letters like this each month, or each week. Some professors are kind enough to have a standard copy-and-paste reply, telling the writer to look at the admissions page.
Of course, the fact that someone sends this kind of letter indicates that they haven't done any background research and have no understanding of the admissions process. Someone who is willing to waste a professor's time without bothering to do any background research is probably not a good candidate for their lab, so most such letters are deleted after a quick glance.
If you absolutely must send letters to individual professors, it's critical to indicate that you are aware of the admissions process. Perhaps you could say something like "I have already started the admissions process, and am trying to learn about my options if and when I am admitted."
But in general, writing to a professor at this stage is like writing to Beyonce saying you might be interested in her latest music, could she advise you on the contents and where it could be purchased? There's very little incentive for her to write back to you.
In 4 out of 5 cases it was explictly written to contact the head of the group for information about open positions and PhD opportunities there. Also could you address point 1, 3, and 4, since they are pretty general they could help me a lot in the future.
"If they tell you there's an open position, what good is that to you, or them?" If they have a PhD position, I will apply and go through the process, if they are not looking for a PhD student I won't apply. So for me the good thing is that I will apply to places where there's a chance to be accepted, cause they're looking for students. For them the good thing is that they will only receive an application when they are recruiting students, and not every time all the time
@iayork Although I agree with you that in the US it is typical to apply to programs, it is also typical for programs to encourage students to contact professors they are interested in working in, and doing so may make it more likely that they are granted an interview, especially if the professor has funding and is looking for a student. OP should acknowledge understanding the process in their email, though.
I hope you won't delete this answer! It's very well written and makes an important point. Questions like this are useful beyond the specific circumstances of any one person, and this seems like the answer that most people in this situation most need to see.
@iayork you ask "it was explicitly written" - by who? Where? Under what circumstances? I provide an example of a professor I didn't write to, in his personal page, in sect. jobs https://www.ics.uzh.ch/~jyoo/home.htm he writes "PhD students are recruited throughout the year when funding is available. Please contact me, if interested. It's not always in their personal pages, sometimes is in the group page, the pages about PhD or sometimes it's written in the advices to the applicants. Anyway my e-mail was mainly about knowing if a thesis in field Y would compromise my chances to work with them
@iayork And since in my department there isn't a group that works on the field of the professor I've written to I had nobody else to ask but directly them. I should have made this point clear both in the e-mails and the questions. As for deleting your question, it's a good question that helped me, the OP, and it may help someone alse, I advice you to keep it
@iayork another example from a university I didn't write to: the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, in their page https://www.en.physik.uni-muenchen.de/promotion/berechtigung/index.html the point 1 is finding a supervisor getting in touch with him/her, point 1 of course comes before the point 2 which is fill the application form and do all the application related things.
@iayork It is European and I'll add it to the question, what is the other point? The fact that it was written to contact them for info?
@iayork Fair enough. I'll delete my comments, then.
@Runlikehell the other critical point is that the professors specifically said to write to them; include the example you gave in the comments
"and probably elsewhere", at least not for Europe in my experience. I have applied to several European universities, and have spoken to many people applying to various unis in Europe and they all were either applying for a fixed vacancy, or with an open letter to the prof, and the prof can make the selection themselves if they have a job opening.
This is completely incorrect in the US for a R1 PhD and is bad advice. A professor who wants a student and has funding will be granted admission. The committee will assign the level of support to a professor who wants a student but does not have funding. After that, only then are the remaining seats are filled up by the committee with unassigned students. I suspect you've confused admissions for a professional/terminal master's program with a full PhD program. The majority of PhD students in all of the schools I've been at go through professors first.
@user71659 iayork’s answer is 100% applicable to my department’s (US, R1, mathematics) graduate admissions system.
It's also correct for the two US R1 schools I've been faculty at, including the one where I was on the admissions committee. I am certainly not confused with masters' programs. It may not be universally true, but I don't believe it's "completely incorrect".
@iayork It's bad advice because you're causing the student to miss out on a primary path into grad school. It is definitely not how all schools do it. Personal experience: one school's R1 science, and 2 engineering departments, and another school's R1 engineering all place individual faculty requests at the top. At my current department, the last batch had less than 25% admitted through the committee.
[I'm answering from a US perspective. In many European PhD programs, advisors advertise funded PhD positions directly, only after funding is approved, and they have complete control over admission into their group. My advice may not apply in that setting.]
I sent it to 5 different professors in different universities, is
the sample too small to expect some answers? I know professors are
flooded with e-mails so it could be normal not receiving answers.
As others have pointed out, professors are busy. In particular, we get a lot of emails like this, mostly from students who are poor fits for our groups and who appear to be spamming every professor they can think of. ("After looking at your research record, especially your paper [random paper title], I think I would be a great match for your group; I am also interested in high-temperature ceramics!") And there is little advice we can give other than "I can't judge your chances without seeing your complete application, I won't know for months whether I'll have funding, and admission isn't up to me anyway. Just apply." So many of us simply find it easier to ignore almost all emails from prospective graduate students. No, it's not friendly, but we don't have time to be friendly to everyone who asks.
On the other hand, if a colleague introduces me to a prospective applicant, I'm much more likely to pay attention and respond. In particular, if a prospective PhD student writes with a substantive technical question about my research area (not just a copy-pasted paper title), that question marks them as a colleague, and I'm much more likely to pay attention and respond.
Can you point out something I did wrong in my email such as: too
long, too short, harsh, too many details, not many details, grammar
mistakes (I'm not a native speaker), anything, to help me improve
for future e-mails?
Remember that by requesting this information you are asking a stranger to do work on your behalf. Don't be surprised or disappointed if they decline.
How do I have to take these silences? Should I solicit an answer or simply accept that they are not interested in answering?
You should interpret the silence as "They must be busy". Nothing more. Contacting them again will not help; they'll still be busy. If you are interested in working with them, apply.
I sent them on a sunday night, is this a bad moment to
send such e-mails? if it is what are the best days and time to send
them?
Email is asynchronous. It doesn't matter when you send it. On the other hand, even under the best of circumstances, from a professor who thinks you're a perfect match for their group, you should not expect a reply in less than a week.
Feel free to give me any kind of advice you think could be helpful.
Figure out where you want to go. Apply there.
Thank you very much for the structured, clear answer and for the helpful advices, pointing out helpful things I didn't think about.
I answered this question myself, but I've learned a lot from this answer about how the admissions process works in (I presume) the US from the professors' perspective. My impression is that in Europe professors have more discretion about who to take on.
@henning It seems the same to me, that's why as a European applying in Europe I found your answer very on point.
@henning Yes in Europe professors - in a some universities at least - have more authority over who they take on, but the rest of the answer still applies. They rarely know long time in advance when they'll have an open position. Once they have an open position they typically advertise that through their standard channels and not by 1-to-1 communication (unless they already personally know a student) and then go through the applications. So the best advice imho is to check their pages (or the ones of the university) for their standard application process and see if there are any openings.
A professor at the University of Victoria in BC has written a post about how to write convincing emails to potential applicants, although this is more targeted at undergraduates:
So you want to go to grad school but can’t figure out why no one is answering your emails….
Additionally, because professors can literally get hundreds of emails a day, you might want to make yours short and more 'to-the-point' while still keeping it polite.
Hello Dr. Professor,
My name is Student, I am an undergraduate at Masters University, and I would like to join your research group for a PhD. I have research experience in XXX and have studied YYY, and my Master's thesis topic is in ZZZ. I want to do research in QQQ and your group's research aligns with my interests. My CV and transcript are attached to this email.
Thank you,
Student
...CV and transcript Attachments...
The short email should be the 'hook' that catches their attention and the CV is there to fill in the details if they are interested in looking further. The transcript may or may not matter depending on where you apply. Sometimes you need decent grades for scholarships.
This is the best answer! Write an email briefly explaining why you are a good fit for the lab and why you want to work with them and attach credentials. Make sure you have at least read the prof's website or a paper, and show in the email that you know what they do.
The concern that you indicate in your email, whether you intend to or not, is that you are asking for your own benefit rather than theirs. You are cold-calling someone and asking them for advice and to save you time. You probably aren't going to get a response unless they are really desperate for a student and know for sure they will have funding, and even then you might get ignored.
1) Make sure you understand the admissions process at these institutions: how do you apply, who makes admissions decisions, etc.
2) Assuming that applications are managed through a program rather than individual professors, just apply to the program you are interested in, and then when you contact a professor tell them that you are applying/intending to apply and let them know you are interested in their research if you are accepted.
3) "Is the topic of the master's degree thesis fundamental for a strong application?" is a question for your current mentors (and maybe even StackExchange), not for professors you haven't met. Asking them if they'd accept someone who did a master's degree in Y sounds silly to me. It makes you sound insecure and clueless about admissions decisions. Tell them what your master's thesis is on and what you are interested in doing in a PhD. You aren't asking about some mythical person who might possibly exist who has maybe done work in a certain area, you should be advocating for yourself.
Asking about your chances is just asking for them to save you the time of submitting an application. If you submit an application it will get reviewed by the same process as everyone else and what matters is not your chances but whether or not you are accepted.
Thank you, all the answer here are helping me in different way. About point 3, I'm not sure about asking to my current mentors or people in my university in general, there isn't a group working in the field the professor I contacted work. So my e-mail was mainly about knowing if a thesis in field Y would compromise my chances to work with them, and I couldn't think about better people to answer this question than them. I should have made it clearer in the e-mails and in the question
@Runlikehell Even so, what does the answer change? If they say it's no problem, you apply. If they say it's a problem, you don't apply. This only saves you time, not them. In your email you are sort of trying to apply without going through the work of applying, which makes it seem like your email is just a spam to a hundred people to narrow down your focus.
Of course it only saves me time, and I think the work of applying shouldn't be a waste of time, I want to apply where there's a chance to be taken, I don't want to apply to 100 universities, 90 of which aren't interested in me so I prefer asking beforehand and save my time, and their time since the professor may not directly look at the application, but somebody will, and 90 useless applications is a lot of time of people I wasted
@Runlikehell Except from the professor's perspective, it isn't just you, it would be everyone else with a similar question. You need to do the work of narrowing it down, not them (which you have already done if you narrowed it down to 5, but your email sounds like it comes from someone who is trying to figure out which of 100).
You're right I can't expect an answer if it's the same question they are asked constantly, but who else could answer this question if not people working in those groups? You think I should apply anyhow without the information that they might not even consider me?
@Runlikehell Yes I do think you should just apply; I think if you did get an answer to one of the emails you sent it would be "apply and find out, your application cannot be evaluated by one small factor."
Asking
1) Is there a good chance your group is going to look for PhD students in 2019/2020?
might show that you haven't done your research, since professors usually advertise whether they are hiring. Do the professors you've contacted have positions advertised? Are they actively advertising that they aren't hiring?
Also, you're asking a subjective, probabilistic question "is there a good chance," which isn't trivial to answer, and "in 2019/2020" is ill-defined (what does it mean?).
Show you've done you're research and ask a straightforward, more-direct question, e.g.,
a) I see that you are currently advertising for X, will a similar offer be available in MONTH YYYY?
Many professors simply won't know the answer if MONTH YYYY is too far ahead, but at least they are then informed about what you are looking for.
Asking
2) Is the topic of the master's degree thesis fundamental for a strong application? For example, what are the chances that a student with a thesis in TOPIC Y would have his application taken very seriously into consideration by a group like yours?
might also show that you haven't done your research, because you should know whether TOPIC Y is interesting to the group.
The question is again rather indirect and non-trivial to answer. It may possibly reflect negatively on you, because the topic is fundamentally important, but there's lots of leeway and you needn't be focusing on the professor's area of interest to be taken on as a student.
Show that you've done your research into the group's topics, explain why your TOPIC Y will help you be a successful PhD student, and ask if you could visit or talk by phone.
Thanks, some of them advertise while in some of their university you have to send e-mails to ask them about it. I know topic Y isn't interesting for the group, but topic Y is what I'm better at the moment and it's probably gonna be the best choice for my thesis ( I could do a better job in less time), hence the question if I could get a PhD there with a thesis in a partially uninteresting topic. Should I let them know that I know it's not really interesting for them and I'm asking only to understand if my PhD application with them is pursuable?
So the first question should be more precise, and you're right I'm too vague, but what if I can't be more precise? I have some family issues that could take or not take a lot of time in the next months and I'm not sure when exactly I will finish the thesis. Should I wait for a time where i could be more precise to send these e-mails ? The problem is that applications require you to move in advance by a lot of months
a thesis in a partially uninteresting topic isn't something that professors are looking for. It reflects badly on you, IMO.
Should I wait for a time where i could be more precise to send these e-mails ? There are too many variables to offer an answer.
I meant partially uninteresting topic for them, sorry. I know it's unrelated to the main question, but this means that I should mainly pursue only PhD's related to the thesis? I can make a new question about this if it's appropriate. Another thing, could you address point 1, 3, and 4, since they are pretty general they could help me a lot in the future.
"in 2019/2020" seems to be a natural way to refer to the 2019/20 academic year, to me. What's the issue?
@Runlikehell I would recommend contacting research groups for whom the topic is actually interesting to maximize your possibility of success.
@DavidRicherby I understand 2019 to mean the start of the 2019 academic year, but not 2019/2020, it seems to suggest a year long PhD course. Anyhow, PhD students start all year around, so assuming 2019/2020 means a particular month in 2019 is rather ambiguous, especially if a professor/school has multiple standard intakes.
@GürayHatipoğlu I don't understand why you're asking me, as opposed to the OP, it is their strategy, not mine. I'm merely suggesting how they can improve their strategy.
@user2768 *shrug* You know that academic years are split across two calendar years. You know that PhDs take longer than two years. It doesn't seem at all rational to guess that 2019/20 refers to a two-year PhD.
@DavidRicherby I know that is true for undergraduates. I don't consider it true for PhD students -- you start when you start... The standard academic calendar makes little sense.
There may be several reasons that you didn't get a response. But your email is just very bad.
Dear professor XXX, I'm a student of XXX at the university of XXX
thinking about applying for PhD in FIELD X, therefore your group at
the university of YYY attracted my attention.
This sentence alone would make your email be ignored.
What is an ideal PhD student for a professor: someone who shares research interests, who is interested in research in his/her group, and who really wants to work with him/her.
That sentence alone showed that you have none of the above.
"FIELD X" ? Terms such as Machine Learning, Software Engineering, etc are too broad that they mean nothing, while PhD is about working on a very narrow topic.
The fact that his/her group attracts your attention because they work on the general FIELD X means you know nothing about research in his/her group. You just want to be admitted in a PhD on FIELD X, and not really want to work with him/her.
I'm not a native English speaker, so my feeling can be wrong. Somehow this sentence sounds very arrogant to me.
If this sentence doesn't stop a professor from reading the rest of the email, other parts are just very weird.
what are the chances that a student with a thesis in TOPIC Y would
have his application taken very seriously into consideration by a
group like yours?
Why would you want to do a PhD when you are not able to do your own homework? Why would the professor should waste his/her time answering your basic questions.
This is a very important question for me as it will have a great
impact in my application strategy and maybe in the selection of the
advisor for the thesis.
This also sounds very arrogant. It implies the professor needs (to try his best) to explain so you can select him as advisor.
Thank you in advance for your time and help if you decide to answer
me.
This sentence is really weird. It shows that you have poor communication skills.
In summary, this email alone shows many evidences that you are an incompetent candidate for his/her group, and that's why you are ignored.
I guess, just guess, you would have higher chance to be responded if you wrote something like:
Dear Prof. XXX,
I'm a ... I'm really interested NARROW-FIELD and, I'm very impressed
with your recent work published in WELL-KNOWN-CONFERENCE (2 or 3 papers), in which you
discovered/improved blah blah.
During my Master, I worked on TOPIC Y, which is also very related (or NOT?).
So I believe my background will be a good fit with your research.
...
Thanks for the feedback, I'm learning a lot from the point you're all making, I didn't feel it was that bad when I wrote it but now I see a lot of mistakes have pointed out. IIhave to edit the question at this point to precise that Topic Y is not their field of research and mine was a request to know if I had a chance to work with them even if I had such a thesis
I sent it to 5 different professors in different universities, is the sample too small to expect some answers? I know professors are flooded with e-mails so it could be normal not receiving answers.
No, if you ask a simple question, you would likely get a response.
Can you point out something I did wrong in my email such as: too long, too short, harsh, too many details, not many details, grammar mistakes (I'm not a native speaker), anything, to help me improve for future e-mails?
In my opinion, it is not direct enough, and not clear what you are asking, or why you are asking it.
How do I have to take these silences? Should I solicit an answer or simply accept that they are not interested in answering?
It's not clear to me how these answers will impact the decision making process, so I would not push it.
I sent them on a sunday night, is this a bad moment to send such e-mails? if it is what are the best days and time to send them?
It shouldn't matter. Trying to guess the optimal time to send emails likely isn't worth your time. A simplistic message is more important.
Feel free to give me any kind of advice you think could be helpful.
The questions should be more direct. If you want to work with the professor, ask them that. Keep in mind they can't speak for other professors and that they don't know who you are.
For your second point in the email, asking if your thesis work will get you admitted shouldn't be asked to a professor, it should be included as part of the application process.
I would suggest rewording into something simple to answer, such as:
Dear professor XXX, I'm a student of XXX at the university of XXX interested in working towards a PhD in FIELD X.
I am attracted to your research group.
Are you (or other professors in the group) accepting new PhD students? My master's thesis work was on TOPIC Y.
Thank you in advance for your time. Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
Best regards,
Run Like Hell.
Thanks for the very structured answer, I really like this kind of answer. My writing not being direct enough is a point that emerged a lot in the answer, thanks for having suggested a potential solution writing a more direct sample of a mail.
If an email like this came to me, I might reply, but it would not be a priority. I would assume that you meant to email Graduate Studies. What would work better for me, is if you emailed to introduce yourself, and asked if I had any time to have a phone call or video conference in the next 3 weeks etc. This would be more intriguing, and the email is very formulaic. I also think your instinct is good about the timing. I often miss emails that come in on Sundays, because Monday starts off with a bang and they just get forgotten about. Good luck with your applications!!
Thank you for the insights, so not only it's not a bad thing to ask for some extra time for a phone call or a video conference, but you say it may even be good. I thought I would go to far and maybe harsh asking for something like this
Absolutely. They can still ignore the request, that is their choice. You would catch my attention and it would show you were serious. I wish you luck!
I see many emails like yours. I appreciate many applicants are sincere, but not realistic. PhD students are a source of income to our School. Their fees are paid for by their governments, institutions, or themselves.
If you have no funding, a random application is pointless as you could not be admitted. When funded PhD places are rarely available, they must be advertised openly. Preference then goes to students who have already studied with us, or published, or both.
As many have pointed out, this just isn't the work flow for PhD admission. We get dozens of mails like this a year, and many are from students sending out what seems to be hundreds of messages hoping for a hit-- because their research interests have nothing to do with mine. We ignore them.
If you're really interested, officially apply to the department. If you're offered a visit, send a message to the prof stating that you've applied, you'll be visiting, and you hope you can schedule an on site interview.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.047414 | 2018-12-06T15:22:41 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121166",
"authors": [
"Adriaan",
"Bryan Krause",
"D.W.",
"Dan Romik",
"David Richerby",
"Fabian Röling",
"Frank Hopkins",
"Holly",
"Peter - Reinstate Monica",
"RenatoRenatoRenato",
"WetlabStudent",
"ZeroTheHero",
"aaaaa says reinstate Monica",
"alephzero",
"chessofnerd",
"fa__",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101620",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11523",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26671",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30716",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30987",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34556",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53936",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63752",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69345",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/705",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79534",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85591",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/90441",
"iayork",
"terdon",
"user2768",
"user71659"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
99290 | Should I do anything if I am cited for something that wasn't in my paper?
I’ve just read a paper in which a previous paper of mine has been cited. The line in which the citation happens is something like:
It has been shown that technique X is successful in this problem [citation for my paper].
However, in my paper, I never mention technique X.
Should I do anything? The paper that cites mine is otherwise fine and really doesn’t need a reference for their use of technique X, since they spend a lot of time developing it anyway.
@uwnojpjm: mainly because I want to be recognized for work I've actually done, rather than just get recognized for existing
Related: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/49633/how-to-react-to-your-work-being-cited-incorrectly-or-in-a-misleading-way
@MichaelStachowsky Sometimes you just gotta play the hand you have.
Get used to it: It happens all. the. time.
I don't necessarily agree with the "any press is good press" stance here --- if technique X actually isn't successful for this problem, then this might spread either a) the belief that OP published an incorrect result or b) that X is applicable and thus waste research time.
I had a much more annoying instance where someone said something like "Such and such happens, even though X claims it does not", and cited my paper as X -- even though I had done the exact opposite, and made no such claim. Exasperating, but I decided it wasn't worth picking a fight about.
I will make @apnorton point less abstract with "It has been shown that smoking cigarettes is successful in curing AIDS (citation for your paper)." but that does not sound like the case here.
Are you absolutely sure that your paper is not an example of some more general technique, even if you didn't think of it that way?
@John_Krampf yeah, I'm super sure that the citation was not actually about my specific paper but seemed to be a typo. Like the accepted answer suggested though, I did end up ignoring it since it was likely just a minor typo.
There really isn't any action worth pursuing here. You could write the editors and ask them to issue a corrigendum stating that the reference was incorrect, but you'll probably waste a lot of time and effort for what is likely a very minor issue.
Agreed. An exception would be a prominent reference in a paper that is potentially read by a very large group of readers - as an extreme example, a reference on page 1 in a Nature article.
If I (as a reader) came across a reference I was interested in or was important to my research, I'd be pretty miffed to waste my time digging through a paper that contains nothing about it.
@Phill: That’s true, but are you going to dig up the corrigendum to see that “Ref. X on p. Y should be Ref. Z?”
@aeismail, well yes I would, I'm not sure how corrigendums (corrigenda?) are handled, but if it came with the paper I just downloaded or was on the website - which I'd hope it would be - then I personally would feel compelled to quickly glance over it before reading (maybe I'm weird)... Then when I found a reference etc. if it triggered my memory then I'd double check the corrigendum before following it.
I completely disagree with this answer. Although it seems unlikely that a corrigendum is required, it makes very good sense to at least contact the authors. If nothing else, it should stop them making the same mistake in their next paper. If the incorrect citation is just a typo, the journal might be willing to correct the online edition; if the paper is on, e.g., ArXiv, the authors might correct it there.
@DavidRicherby: Most journals do not correct online editions after they have been published; they only do corrigenda. You may want to send an email; others may find it's not worth the effort. I certainly don't want to have to deal with the nonsense of publishers for something like this. (I've dealt with a publisher-made error, and it was bad enough then.) If it's a repeated pattern, then maybe.
@aeismail OK, but mailing the authors isn't going to take any significant amount of time.
Since you never mention their technique, it is quite likely it's a "typo" (they accidentally cited a different paper than they meant, which, at least, in my field happens more than 0% of the time), or they just misunderstood your paper (or you misunderstood your paper). I agree with @aeismail that there's nothing you need to do, but if you want to get to the bottom of this, you could contact the authors, saying something like:
I noticed you cited my paper in ... about X. However, that paper didn't consider X. Did you mean to refer to another paper? If so, I'd be interested in knowing which paper.
Contacting the authors, rather than the editor, has two advantages. It is a less drastic, friendlier action, and it gives them an opportunity to fix the mistake in future papers in the same research area.
The stated situation doesn't appear to present enough evidence to go beyond where we should be assuming good faith. If the OP has a way to contact the authors, this appears to be a good way to handle this. The issue is much more likely to be a case where the author just made an unintentional error, as opposed to being intentional misrepresentation. I would expect that most authors who made such a mistake would want to know about it, so it could be corrected in any future publication.
Good points there. I think I'll send a quick email, just to see what the idea was
How is this not the accepted answer!
... "or you misunderstood your paper". Duh?
@MichaelStachowsky You might want to consider changing the accepted answer.
@299792458 Misunderstanding one's own papers is possible, in the sense that I might not be thinking about X when I write a paper and therefore wouldn't mention X in the paper, yet an alert reader familiar with X would immediately see that my paper is relevant to X and perhaps even provides important information about X. On more than one occasion, I've had to give a theorem an attribution of the form "This was proved but not stated by so-and-so in reference such-and-such."
Yes, you should write the authors.
I disagree with both @aeismail and @Kimball, in that I believe it is important to address the incorrect reference, and you should go to at least some effort to do it. Since it's not a critical reference in the paper OP mentioned, I would not do much, but we should be striving for published research to be absolutely correct on the facts (as opposed to opinions/perspectives/etc) so as not to confuse future readers.
So, a minimum of something like this (the wording is just a suggestion of course):
I've recently read your paper Their paper. Some nice words about their paper so as not to appear too hostile. I've also noticed the paper quotes own my work in Your paper regarding technique X. However, that paper of mine does not actually discuss technique X nor use it. Did you intend to refer to another paper (e.g. Some other paper which might be more appropriate)? Regardless, I'd like to ask you to consider taking some action to address this issue (perhaps by contacting The Journal), to ensure readers are not confused by the reference.
would be in order. Be respectful in addressing them.
I agree with writing the authors, but disagree with telling them what you think they should do. So that email but without the last sentence, and maybe add a sentence at the beginning saying something nice about their paper.
@NoahSnyder: See edit.
You have a number of options. Beginning with writing the editor, author, or publisher. If they refuse to redact or recall or issue or public correction, what you can do is come out publicly to scorn the misuse of your work. This is especially true for scientific works that are being deliberately misrepresented, or maliciously used to advance some agenda. You have a duty to call out false reasoning in all contexts, but even more so when your own work is being used to do it. At worst, your work will advance bad science or social ideologies, depending on the work. At best, if it goes unchecked and unnoticed, it could tarnish your own reputation because people may not verify what your work actually says.
This is gratuitously heavy-handed for the situation described in the question ("The paper [...] really doesn't need a reference for their use of technique X, since they spend a lot of time developing it anyway..."). Do you really think that "public scorn" is appropriate here? Come on.
What Im going for is public awareness of those deliberately trying to manipulate the masses with false research. Do you think that is inappropriate or ineffectual? Do you really think false research should be ignored by those who see it for what it is, whether because they had a direct or indirect hand in it? I question your ethics and your involvement in these tactics if you have a problem with truth being called out. However harshly the people react is on them, not on those doing the calling out.
Fundamentally this question is about ethics. Not just on the part of the BS research(er), but on the poor sap who was misquoted, and a duty we all have in science to the truth. Harsh social reaction is not inappropriate, no, and if that utterly destroys the reputation of a liar passing his garbage off as science then so be it. Its all for the greater good. I cannot imagine anyone in academia disagreeing with this. Its your reputations and your work and especially the reputation of your institutions as unbiased and quality campuses that are at stake.
This goes well beyond an accidental misquoting or misinterpretation of source material. It could very well have ideological undertones and be socially/culturally manipulative, at worst, and at best, the inability of the paper-writer to adequately interpret source material speaks to his competency in the field. But ultimately, the refusal of the author to retract his publication after realizing a falsity speaks to intent, or ego, neither of which belong in academia.
So no, I dont think that this guy writing a public notice pointing out to readers the misuse of his work - in particular after the abuser has been informed and chosen to do nothing about it - is at all inappropriate or excessive. How could it be? The abuser ought to be ashamed of himself and perhaps will be shamed, but that is not the intent of the notice. The intent is to preserve the sanctity of the original source work and the reputation of its author, respect for the sanctity of science, respect for all readers of both papers.
I have laid out one optional solution based on a detail that is not specified in the question. Given the outlined scenario, I cannot fathom a reason why anyone would take issue with this solution unless they were a part of the problem themselves.
Don't you think you slightly exaggerate things here? Did you consider that the wrong quotation may just be a typo and not the meanness of the author who is trying to end the the world? I find myself often copy+pasting references in LaTex from my bib, grabbing a wrong citation would stay unnoticed.
I think youre the one blowing things out of proportion. I gave an OPTION based on details that were not explicit in the question. If it applies, use it. If it doesnt, dont. You clearly didnt read my content. If you accidentally grab a wrong quote and the author of your source - or anyone else - pointed it out to you, youd make a correction, would you not? My post is premised on the idea that you refuse to correct yourself when pointed out - then youd be in the wrong for malicious and deliberate intent. If you cannot wrap your mind around this then that is your problem.
Whooooa there. For all you know, the error is a simple typo and the paper says "Widget theory, as developed in [14]" when it should really be "Widget theory, as developed in [41]" or something similar. Please stop throwing around these wild accusations of gross misconduct that are based on nothing more than supposition.
Answerer, please be reminded of Hanlon's razor.
"Mistakes" happen. But if the person responsible for a mistake refuses to correct himself, and abuses your work and your name, as is the premise of what Im saying, then such people dont deserve sympathy. If they are so "innocent" then they wont have a problem coming forward with a public admission and redacting their own work... and there is nothing for you to do. If youre FORCED to do something yourself THEN to hell with the person and their so-called "mistake".
@leewz Malice or not, even the genuine idiot writing works passed off as science also need to be called out for what they are. Thats how you preserve the sanctity of science.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.050459 | 2017-11-22T19:57:51 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99290",
"authors": [
"299792458",
"Andreas Blass",
"Bamboo",
"CogitoErgoCogitoSum",
"David Richerby",
"John_Krampf",
"Konrad Rudolph",
"Makyen",
"Mayou36",
"Michael Stachowsky",
"Miguel",
"Noah Snyder",
"Patricia Shanahan",
"WetlabStudent",
"aeismail",
"apnorton",
"corsiKa",
"einpoklum",
"emory",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10220",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136217",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14695",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17534",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22966",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26671",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43138",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45408",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52338",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53536",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83272",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83350",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9934",
"iayork",
"leewz",
"lighthouse keeper",
"pipe"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
2280 | Paper stolen by a co author and published as his own
Possible Duplicate:
My research work stolen and published as his own by the co author without my consent
My research paper was stolen by a co-author. I have reported her but the head of my institution is defending that teacher. I have all the mail correspondences between the unethical co-author and myself along with all the data that I produced as part of my contribution.
How do I go about proving my side of defense? My faculty are trying to prove that she has done this as a part of her MTECH, which is completely false!
What do I do?
@recursion.ninja Hi. Please refrain from editing closed questions when your edit does not fix the problem related to why the question was closed in the first place.
@recursion.ninja Have a look at this meta post.
@MadJack thanks for the reference. I have reviewed it and understand the community's position on such questions. I didn't know it would affect the re-open queue. Can I ask why this revision was rejected? I thought it greatly improved readability. What is the community's standards on revisions for formatting & readability?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.051549 | 2012-07-03T14:19:21 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2280",
"authors": [
"G. H. Hardly",
"Haider Al-Wasiti",
"Kathir",
"Liam W",
"Mad Jack",
"Phoshi",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/138992",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17275",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5680",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5681",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5682",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5683",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5684",
"recursion.ninja",
"spikey_richie"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
5986 | tips for mathematics student giving interview for physics (quantum information)
As suggested by @PiotrMigdal I am putting a separate question regarding the title mentioned above.
I am a Mathematics PhD student doing work in functional analysis / operator theory aspects of quantum information. My basic training (up to masters) is in so called 'Pure Mathematics' ($C^*$ algebra, representation theory, elliptic curve etc.). I am about to complete my PhD and applying for post doctoral positions. It seems most of the jobs in this area are for experimentalists and a few for theorists. I do not have much knowledge about experiment. Moreover, my understanding about quantum measurements as very basic. These can be considered as negative points. Positive sides: I have a few published papers in some reputed physics journal, a few (in discrete mathematics) preprints, and a few works in the draft stage. However the published papers are not reviewed by math. review.
My question is, what a mathematics student, like me, should focus/emphasise if he/she go for a job (for me post doctoral) interview in front of physics faculties.
Also more general question can be regarding the job perspective of mathematics students in quantum information. Advanced thanks for any suggestion, answer etc. Feel free to edit and/or retag it, if you think it is necessary.
Thanks to both Noah Snyder and Piotr Migdal. I hope some more users can also help me as well as the community sharing his/her views.
It may be too late for this, but I'd suggest giving a talk for physicists in a lower stakes setting (eg a seminar at a school that isn't interviewing you). Physicists often have different names for things and ways of talking about them, and it can be really nice to have some exposure to the kinds of questions you might get asked.
"Physicists often have different names for things..." this applies (obviously) not only to the case under consideration, but also to any interdisciplinary subject that can be approached from two different directions.
indeed so.. though not that much in quantum mechanics, but i had to spend a lot of time to understand the daily techniques of physicists, mathematically (C* alg or measure theory point of view) and yet to sufficiently understand many things
A lot of quantum information is a part of mathematics (that is, mathematically well-defined concepts, proper proofs, etc...), with some physical motivation. Many problems can be stated easily as mathematical ones, without providing and physical grounding.
So if you are a pure maths PhD, then it may be actually beneficial for you, as you: can prove (not only hand-wave) and perhaps have better training (and motivation) in Hilbert spaces, group theory, discrete mathematics, abstract algebra, convex geometry, algorithmic complexity, information theory etc...
Surely, different groups have different tastes for different problems, different emphasis on physical, mathematical, numerical and experimental content. Just ask them; if it is pure quantum information then maybe even you can go without knowing quantum mechanics (which is worth learning anyway, BTW).
Source: I am PhD student in geometry of quantum states; a considerable fraction of people working on that topic are mathematicians.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.051697 | 2012-12-31T15:34:32 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5986",
"authors": [
"Changwang Zhang",
"RSG",
"Willie Wong",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15547",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15640",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15642",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4462",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94",
"user3244556",
"user3264805",
"user3656142"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
29212 | What to do with a result too small to be publishable, but interesting nonetheless?
Let's assume, for the sake of example, that I have found a new figure of merit which is of the same complexity as the one currently used, but is much more justified from a mathematical and physical standpoint. However, the whole development barely goes over one paragraph (maybe two), as the "proof" is extremely simple and straightforward.
Now, I was planning on saving this smaller result for a bigger paper on the same topic, where I'd introduce this new figure of merit along with other results, but the future of this other paper has become quite uncertain lately.
Is there any way I could still present this new (small) result?
There is a website somewhere where you can publish single figures, complete with authors and DOI and fully citable. If I remember the name I will post it as an answer.
I'm afraid I can't find it. I'm quite sure I learned about it either on [Academia.SE] or on [OpenData.SE], so perhaps someone else can. What I have in mind is basically an online-only "journal" that publishes single science-quality figures (with captions), complete with doi, list of authors, etc.
Poster, short paper, workshop paper, or tech report.
I have a couple of small things sitting on my webpage. One of them has been cited by two sets of authors (unlike my papers, sigh). One of them is also on the arXiv.
Did you consider having it on Arxiv ?
@gerrit do you mean figshare?
@Michael Yes, I do! You could add that as an answer, as I think it might fit user8001's needs.
File it away in the interesting results tab of your file cabinet and move on or investigate more. Maybe in many years you or someone will have some results you cannot explain and the results from this earlier experiment will enter your mind and progress may be made. I believe Fleming merely mentioned the properties of what turned out to be Penicillin as something interesting but an "aside" it his early publication(s). I like the posting in on arXiv comment as well to take ownership should something develop from it.
The reason why you're publishing is because you think you have a new way of doing things that is better than the old way of doing things. Simply publishing a derivation of the new way isn't sufficient to convince people of that fact. You need to convince people that your new way is better.
So yes, your derivation is a simple one to two paragraphs, but in addition to that you should spend several paragraphs explaining why your new way is better. Why was the old way used? Why weren't the deficiencies not considered a problem until now? (Or if they were, how were they addressed with the old way, and why is your way better?) What are some of the objections that the people used to doing it the old way will raise? Why might they not want to switch to your new way? What do you say to those potential objections? Are there possible use cases might your new way not be appropriate for, and if so, how do you choose between the old way and the new way?
You'll probably also want to spend several paragraphs in an introduction, explaining how the field got to the old way, and outlining the deficiencies. You probably also want to include and example of using your new way, comparing it to the old way, illustrating why the new way is better.
Basically, you think your paper is too short because you're planning on just presenting the derivation and assuming its merits are obvious to others. They won't be. In all likelihood you'd be chewed up in review - not because your paper is too short, but because you won't have convinced the reviewers that your new method is worthwhile. Fleshing out the paper with necessary background and discussion to presents a coherent argument for your new method can easily take you into the 1-2 page range which is the typical size of "brief communications" (depending on field, journal, etc.)
Don't pad your article just to increase its size, but don't omit things which will bolster the arguments in favor of your new method.
Edit: In response to comments, here's an attempt at clarification: An academic paper is not just about presenting results. It's also about presenting a story and an argument. How does this result change the field? How should it change how the readers think about the topic?
I'm guessing that the original questioner thinks their paper is only one to two paragraphs because they were anticipating presenting just the short proof/derivation of the new figure of merit. My point was that the proof itself is insufficient for a decent paper. In addition to the proof you also need to convince the reader that the new figure of merit is better than the old one - and to do so for people who may be unaware that there was anything wrong with the existing way in the first place. Doing this properly can easily extend the paper from 1-2 paragraphs into a size which is more typical for a standard journal article. Write a proper paper, and it's no longer "too small to be publishable".
I'm confused by your answer...
@Mindwin - If the edit is not sufficient, please elaborate on the area of your confusion.
I will blame language barrier. But now I see you are correct in saying that communication is about what the listener understands, not what the speaker tries to say. What is obvious to Archimedes won't be so to Erasthothenes. +1'd
You can think of publishing it as a short communication, many journals accept this kind of contribution (they can be designated in different ways, depending on the journal). As I recall, the shortest article ever published was of about 3 lines [1] ;-)
[1] F. Lenz, "The Ratio of Proton and Electron Masses", Phys. Rev. 82, 554, 1951.
[...] the shortest article ever published was of about 3 lines Interesting. Can you provide any reference?
@EnthusiasticStudent: I've added a reference. I've found a picture of it, but adding this would probably result in copyright infringment. Actually, I'm not sure it's the shortest, but it would be surely difficult to write a shorter one.
Some other examples of short papers: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/7330/which-math-paper-maximizes-the-ratio-importance-length (the list includes papers of length 6 lines and 9 lines.)
Nope. Shortest paper is The unsuccessful self-treatment of a case of “writer's block”
@ff524 Wow! How is it a paper?!
@ff524: Lol. Definitely unbeatable, if we don't count note 1 :-)
Guys, they've only used lemon juice and x-rays for the initial review. We can do mass spec, smoke signals, and MRIs in our review and publish our findings 41 years after the initial report.
In many physics publication these go by the name "letters". Indeed there are Journals---such as Physical Review Letters---devoted entirely to them, and many other journals also accept them. PRL is notable for it's short time to press.
On a related note, this is the shortest abstract I know of: http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.2832. That's a grand total of two words!
@Compass it already has been replicated in a multi site study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2078566/?report=classic
I would submit the manuscript as a short paper, or even a poster in a workshop. Workshop papers and posters in my domain (computer science) usually demonstrate more early results of ongoing research.
A poster will only solve half the problem, though, won't it? Anyone not at the workshop won't be able to find out about it, and there won't be a permanent document that a future researcher could read and cite. Maybe poster + arXiv preprint, or poster + publish in some journal?
@Nate Eldredge, regarding posters, I have in mind reputable conferences that publish posters online and in conference proceedings. See for instance the posters here, 2-page publications in fact, which can be read and cited: http://www2013.wwwconference.org/papers/companion.htm#P
Oh, I see. Thanks. In my field a poster is literally just a poster and there is no permanent record of its content.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.052012 | 2014-09-30T12:46:13 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/29212",
"authors": [
"Aru Ray",
"Austin Henley",
"Compass",
"Gimelist",
"Grace",
"If you do not know- just GIS",
"Jessica B",
"John Clay",
"Mahmoud Akl",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Mindwin Remember Monica",
"Myoch",
"Nate Eldredge",
"R.M.",
"Ronn Weasley",
"StrongBad",
"clifton mandanda",
"dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten",
"enthu",
"ff524",
"garywdfld",
"george",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11523",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17209",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21360",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21766",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22013",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22213",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22409",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/532",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/746",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80037",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80038",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80040",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80044",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80046",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80065",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80131",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80302",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/948",
"seteropere",
"terdon",
"user80038",
"user80046"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
15119 | Should one mention multiple, albeit somewhat unrelated research interests?
As the question implies, I have two main research interests in the natural language processing and computational genomics domains. While I have a preference for the former, I am also very interested in the latter. I ask because I am not sure if it would look like I am too unfocused for a PhD. Many professors seem to have multiple areas of interests, some of which are not too related, but nonetheless I want to make sure that mentioning multiple interests will not hurt me.
What makes you think those interests are unrelated?
@JeffE I don't think that they're entirely distinct. There's a decent amount of overlap, I'm just afraid of coming off as being unfocused.
If you can convey your enthusiasm for the overlap of these two somewhat distinct areas, you will be ahead of the game. A PhD candidate is expected to extend the limit of human knowledge, and one of the better ways to do so is to research within the overlap of two (or more) disciplines. I would tend to see having more than one area of interest as being an advantage rather than a disadvantage. Of course, as your question implies, a multiplicity of interests can backfire by causing a candidate to appear unfocused. Focus on the overlap, and make your application shine!
Your PhD should be somewhat focused, but before that, you're not in general supposed to have real scientific results. I would surely mention both, unless you feel that one of them is significantly unsignificant.
If you managed to have multiple results as a master student, that makes you a very good candidate for a PhD, because not many people have that!
The answer depends on you, the professor and when and how you communicate, .
Mention Both
Better mention both than fear. Until you handle the fear to stand for both interests it will not go away. When you are clear about what you fear you may know the answer already.
Showing that you have a broad interest means that you are open to change.
You may get angry at yourself for not having mentioned the other interest. Especially because professors know other professors to redirect to.
If you write you can make sure that it is clearly understood that you have two interest. Such as by choosing a headline for each. The professor may then choose what to focus on.
If you talk to the professor you get responses what (s)he likes most. Then you can focus on that.
Mention One
When there is not enough time for both topics it could be bad to mention both.
Mentioning both can mean that the professor does not choose you because (s)he only takes in people with one interest who can be put under more presure because they can not choose to go somewhere else.
Sometimes professors are really proud of themselves because nobody ever tells them they are wrong. You may have to adjust what you say so they do not fear your intelligence in a field they do not know.
I come from a computer science background. There may be different cultural influences in other professions.
So to summarize: Mention both unless your professor is a jerk?
I do not really know.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.052776 | 2013-12-27T15:46:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15119",
"authors": [
"A Learning Place",
"Ahmed Sam",
"Huang Xiao",
"JeffE",
"Peter Cordes",
"Raptor",
"Steve P.",
"User",
"gawdzilla",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39379",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39381",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39383",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39388",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39494",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39505",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8022"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
14003 | Why do so many people apply to so few PhD programs?
Most of the schools that I've looked at for PhD programs in Computer Science have between a 9-15% acceptance rate. I've noticed similar acceptance rates for other programs outside of computer science; yet almost everyone that I've ever spoken to has only applied to a handful of schools. This just doesn't make sense to me.
Let's just say that each school that I apply to has ~15% acceptance rate, then if I only apply to only 6 schools, I have roughly a 63% chance of getting accepted to at least one (1-probability of getting declined everywhere). That doesn't seem horrible, but if I know I want to do a PhD, I would like to have much higher odds, plus most of the programs are closer to a 10% admissions rate. I understand that applications are costly both monetarily and temporally speaking, but having a 37% chance of not getting into any programs is pretty bad. Whereas if I apply to 14 schools, I have about a 10% chance of not getting accepted anywhere. Can someone please explain the thought process behind this?
PhD students are not chosen randomly from those who apply!
Your assumption that admission decision is independent is wrong.
People only apply to a few select programs because they are looking to do a PhD on a topic that interests them. If you are happy to work on a huge number of topics, you may not be focused enough to start a PhD.
I would add that your sample (people you know) is not large enough and not iid (independent and identically distributed).
Fair enough. I actually am quite familiar with the process, but didn't know a better way to simply evaluate the probability of getting into an institution. On another note, there are quite a lot of universities doing similar research, so I'm not sure why one would assume that I want "to work on a huge number of topics."
@daniel: Maybe this varies by field. In mathematics (in the US) I would say it's the minority of students who enter a PhD program knowing what they want to work on, or even in what area. Of those who do know, most change their mind. So at least in mathematics, not having a focused sense of what you want to work on is not necessarily a danger sign.
Surprised that no one pointed out that it's not just, "I want to get a Ph.D". The PLACE where you get into matters, sometimes a lot, and often times more than the fact that you'll "get a Ph.D".
Although, I like your way of analytical thinking, some ouf your assumptions do not hold:
Selection procedures of PhD programs are not random.
The selection procedure of one PhD program is not independent from other programs, as it is likely based on similar characteristics and markers in your CVs. (Maybe, there is conditional independence given 3, but that is problematic because the value of 3 is relative to the local distribution of 4.)
Your application profile does not change.
You do not know who your competitors are which may also vary between programs (and time).
Therefore, I would assume that people use their applications as measures to test the unknown distribution of the accessibility of PhD programs. Unfortunately, this accessibility changes every term/year because of different populations of applicants. Furthermore, information about the specific demands and requirements of PhD programs is limited because it is time-consuming to look them up and sometimes they are simply hidden. That makes it reasonable to concentrate only on few programs and draw convenient samples. If applicants fail, it is easier to adapt, as your application costs were moderate, and to finally accept that there were better competitors and go on with life.
Oddly enough, I am quite familiar with the process, but I didn't know a better way to try to evaluate the probability of getting into an institution, given that I essentially have little to no data. In the least pretentious way possible, I am not worried about getting in, I just know quite a lot of people who only applied to a handful of top programs and was confused as to why they would do so. I guess what it comes down to me is that even if you are a ridiculously awesome candidate, if you only apply to a few schools, isn't there a non-negligible chance that you won't get in anywhere?
Of course, there is a real chance that you won't get in anywhere. But how can you figure out by yourself that this is due to your sample of programs and not your relative profile? It seems to me that the best strategy is to use some kind of a mixing approach applying at programs with both high/low reputation and high/low specialization.
Fair enough. That's what I plan to do.
If I would have known that you ask the question for yourself, I would have answered somewhat less ironic. I hope that you do not feel offended!
Not at all. It was clever and informative.
There are several levels on which one could answer your question:
One could say that people (even those applying for graduate school in quantitative fields) typically don't approach things logically. Someone will suggest a number of schools to them, and they will apply without doing such a probabilistic analysis.
The statistics you want to do such an analysis properly are just not accessible. I haven't been able to find any graduate programs in math (my subject) that publish admission stats. (EDIT: I was totally wrong about this. It seems that the secret is to look at central rather than department websites. For example, the stats for my department are here) You even if you wanted to carefully analyze things, the data isn't there. I think anecdotally, people have found that 6 or 7 schools with a good range of rankings is good enough. If people were doing this intelligently and still getting in nowhere, I think the CW would change.
I think the number of people who only apply to places where they have a 15% chance is small; smart students will apply to a couple of the best places (thus giving a few places very low acceptance rates) but also a range of places with lower ranking and easier admission. If you look at this thread, for example, you'll see very few people rejected from all the places they applied, even though you'll see many rejected from most of them. In general, grad schools outside the very top tier are pretty hungry for good students; admission to a top 5 program is of course very hard. Getting into a top 50 one might be easier than you think.
People who only apply to a couple of top places have revealed a preference: they are interested in getting a Ph.D., but only at a top place. This is a reasonable position; I'm not sure what objection you have with it. Just because you can get into some program doesn't make it a good idea.
This isn't precisely what Ben Crowell says below, but his comment and post reminded me: people tend to operate on short time horizons. The trouble and expense of more applications is very visible and concrete, and the trade-off of maybe going to a school which is worse on some dimension of prestige/fellowship/fit etc. is very indefinite and far off. Thus, people will tend to focus more on the former and somehow push off the latter to some corner of their mind.
I've gotten the general sense that undergrads don't have a very visceral feel for how going to a higher vs. lower ranked graduate program affects their chances of success in academia. Of the faculty in my current department, almost all the PhDs from the US are accounted for by the Ivies, the University of California system, Chicago and MIT. At Oregon, where I was previously, I once calculated that half of the US PhDs in the department went to Harvard, MIT, Berkeley or Stanford. One can argue how much of that is selection bias, how much is getting a genuinely different education, and how much is just the power of the name, but I think they all play some part.
@BenCrowell I think you're reacting to something offhand which was not my main point (I think we may be interpreting "the best" a bit differently; I mean top 5, not top 20). To rephrase, I think most students very consciously try to include schools where they feel confident of getting in (or at least the schools amongst those which are acceptable which give them the best chance). People who apply to a few top places are telling you what's acceptable to them.
There are so many factors you are ignoring in your analysis... No offense but I have to say that your understanding of recruitment is lacking a lot of depth. Recruitment strategies and practices vary quite a bit but below I tried to give some ideas to the shortcomings (IMHO) of your analysis.
TL;DR: Recruitment is a complex procedure that typically has many factors that are asymmetrically known to different parties. Writing applications, personal letters etc is almost an art in itself. Thus it's important to get a better understanding of the system before jumping into conclusions with misleading statistics.
Outcomes
You seem to take the outcome as a binary variable, while for a single application it might be a valid way to see it, for a single applicant it might be misleading. Based on the project at hand and the candidates in question, the fact that you didn't make it for that particular application isn't necessarily independent of any future incidents, or rather the other way around; your future applications will most likely not be independent of the previous one(s).
It's quite the contrary, actually. You might have significantly increased, or decreased, your chances for a future position with the same group, or at another group associated with the one you applied to. That's practically based on the competition (to which you are will be in the dark) for the project you applied to, and to the impression you have left on the admission committee or the individual PI/group leader. It's important to keep in mind that people talk. In other words, your reputation will most likely proceed you, whether that is positive or negative that's a different story.
Fairness
One might like to think otherwise, but life isn't always fair and recruitment is typically one of those scenarios. In most respectable universities, all open positions need to be publicly announced, which means that anyone in the world can practically apply to them. Furthermore, there are usually laws and regulations that are put in place to work against discrimination of any kind.
What might get forgotten, however, is that the projects aren't really randomly devised. It is not that uncommon for a position to be announced so specifically that it's essentially tailor-made for a candidate; practical examples of this case could be the continuation of a master thesis work, or any similar project work. Such a position could be de facto filled months in advance.
If you are applying to a position at a group with no prior knowledge of the place, you might actually be applying to a position that is already filled. However, many PIs use the public application procedure to "scout talent". In other words, you might not be an interesting target for the project/position you have applied to, but you might still be very interesting for an upcoming project (see previous section "Outcomes").
Spamming
If you are looking at numbers only, you might be mislead on accessing the real number of feasible candidates. I might be insensitive, or even offensive to a certain degree, but there are people who do not even read the job description and mass-apply (especially if it's free to apply). I work with bioinformatics, and among the other candidates there were some who apparently: "... always dreamed of the chance to be a radio engineer, and thus would gladly take the opportunity to ..." (I have not seen the application myself, as it'd be a conflict of interests. I heard about this much later at a pub gathering with my colleagues and boss)
You would be muddying the statistics if you count with people that would be sorted out almost immediately.
Hype
Word gets around, quickly... So more and more people want the same thing; "Did you hear {insert_famous_professor} group has announced a new position?!" While that is a normal human behavior, it also points out a fundamental defect in the way we reason; just because something is famous it's not necessarily better than something else that isn't as reknown. At this point it's also worth noting that a successful senior scientist isn't necessarily a good teacher of doing science. The distinction might not be very apparent prior to doing a PhD but a couple of years into academia, you start noticing the difference.
In other words, while most people swarm over a few number of positions, very few apply to many positions elsewhere. Ask any head-hunter (recruitment professionals) and they'll even give you statistics.
Suitability
Call me a snob if you will, but doing a PhD isn't a god-given right to all humans. It's a job, a career path and thus not suitable for everyone. Please note that I do not, in any way, mean that you are not suitable to do a PhD (it would not be my place to make a judgement, even if I knew you in person). I am merely stating that if a person is consistently getting a rejection, the chances are highly likely that the person is being unrealistic, or stronly under/over-valuing his/her skills. The negative effect of over-valuing is obvious, I suppose, but modesty or humility to the extreme could also impair one's chances of getting an acceptance.
Hope it helps!
Oddly enough, I am quite familiar with the process, but I didn't know a better way to try to evaluate the probability of getting into an institution, given that I essentially have little to no data. In the least pretentious way possible, I am not worried about getting in, I just know quite a lot of people who only applied to a handful of top programs and was confused as to why they would do so. I guess what it comes down to me is that even if you are a ridiculously awesome candidate, if you only apply to a few schools, isn't there a non-negligible chance that you won't get in anywhere?
Sure the risk always exists, but a good-enough (at least on paper) and driven candidate should not have a really hard time finding a position, given that it's a VERY narrow, specialised field.
Sometimes the applicant is the former Master's, postdoc, or Undgraduate resarch student of the Professor who has an open position and they can make an offer to do PhD research after going through the bureaucratic motions of posting an opening and (faux?) interviewing some applicants. Unless a more-qualified applicant sues, the former student is likely to get the position. The posting will be pulled down at that point. This is probably illegal in most places, but done right, who's going to know that it was wired for a former student or postdoc? It's possible someone in the lab will know the "new" person from prior work with them and rat them out to HR. Usually, wired positions work by having the targeted person apply as usual, go through the competitive process, and turn out to be the selectee, for research positions, at least. I have no insight to seeing profs hired this way.
Why would a former postdoc be offered a PhD position?
Well, no, but they might be offered an asst. prof. position.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.053095 | 2013-11-11T09:27:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14003",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Arulx Z",
"Ben Webster",
"Bill Barth",
"Bitwise",
"Concha Gomez",
"Gweet Soer",
"Irwin",
"Jill Clover",
"Johnny Derpp",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Nathan",
"Phil D",
"Physics_maths",
"Radha Krishnan B",
"Ray",
"Richard Lyons",
"Steve P.",
"StrongBad",
"bionicgij",
"boscovich",
"flint_stone",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36114",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36115",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36116",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36117",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36119",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36123",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36125",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36126",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36139",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36211",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36238",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36255",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5674",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5944",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/663",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6862",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6962",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8022",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8067",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"nhern121",
"non-numeric_argument",
"posdef",
"user126084"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
6113 | Value of Print on Demand Publishing of PhD Dissertation
Following on from my question here, I understand there are many non-traditional methods of publishing a PhD dissertation as a book. One of it is Print of Demand (POD) method. A contributor to the question in the above link gives VDM as an example.
However, a close look at the Wikipedia article (same link as the VDM) reveals that POD is not peer reviewed and often adds little to a person's publication record.
I am wondering that if a PhD dissertation is of sufficient standard to be passed by the relevant university (assuming the University is reputable itself), why does it need to be peer-reviewed? Also, if it is reproduced as a book by POD, why shouldn't it add to the publication record of the author.
The PhD is often the first major work of many students (I fall in this category) so making the most out of it is the only way to add value to one's CV.
I am wondering that if a PhD dissertation is of sufficient standard to be passed by the relevant university (assuming the University is reputable itself), why does it need to be peer-reviewed?
In an ideal world, that could be reasonable, but in practice it's unclear what the standards are for a dissertation. For example, imagine a student who works diligently for years but doesn't accomplish much. Many advisors, even in very prestigious departments, will eventually let the student graduate with a minimal dissertation. Or what about a sloppy student whose dissertation is full of minor errors? Hopefully the advisor will put pressure on the student to fix the errors, but sometimes, given the choice between letting the student graduate and keeping on struggling fruitlessly with this, the advisor caves in and approves a shoddy thesis. Perhaps this shouldn't happen, but occasionally it does.
Of course peer-reviewed journals are also far from perfect, but their judgments are somewhat clearer. A paper accepted by the Transactions of the American Mathematical Society is a more meaningful guarantee of quality than a dissertation from a top-five math department, although on average the dissertations will be better.
Peer review can also lead to valuable feedback and suggestions. A dissertation has often not received many comments from anyone not on the thesis committee, and getting anonymous feedback from other experts can be important.
Also, if it is reproduced as a book by POD, why shouldn't it add to the publication record of the author.
The problem is that it doesn't "add" anything that wasn't already there. Your dissertation is part of your academic track record, and your decision to let a company print it on demand is not additional evidence of quality or impact.
It's certainly useful to try to get visibility for your dissertation. In a field where this is considered appropriate, posting it online (for example, on the arXiv) is very valuable. Far more people will look at it there than via any POD publisher. Letting someone print it on demand too can't hurt, as long as there are no copyright issues, but it won't help much either.
The PhD is often the first major work of many students (I fall in this category) so making the most out of it is the only way to add value to one's CV.
Certainly. In most fields, you can make the most of it academically by turning it into journal articles or a scholarly book. Mathematics isn't a book-based field, so I can't speak to this from personal experience, but my understanding is that publishing a dissertation as a book involves a lot of review and editing, and it's really not the same as letting a POD publisher reprint the dissertation.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.054153 | 2013-01-10T00:35:49 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/6113",
"authors": [
"JustinDickens",
"helptheignorant",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15897",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15898",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15899",
"user16896"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
66052 | What do researchers mean by the "priority" of an idea?
I have heard the term "priority" used in regards to research ideas. For example, How does one determine priority, prominence, and impact with regard to books, rather than articles? asks about priority (and other things) in regards to books.
From the usage I have seen in this community, priority appears to be established when you submit a manuscript (e.g., to a publisher or arXiv). This seems very weird to me, so I am worried that I am missing something. The time at which an idea is submitted for publication can be years after the idea was had, so it seems priority is not giving credit to the first individual who had the idea. Since the review process is confidential and it can take years for an idea to get published, priority is not being given to the person who first disseminated the idea either.
What exactly is priority and why does it matter?
The term priority is important in patent law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_priority
"What exactly is priority" -- Isaac Newton demonstrated many important scientific truths, one of which is that priority is whatever you can argue it is ;-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz%E2%80%93Newton_calculus_controversy
The way I use this term, "priority" means "who had this idea first". Of course, everyone can come up and say "hey, I totally had this idea to determine graph isomorphism in quasipolynomial time in 1990", so it is difficult to validate a priority claim unless there is some written material to back it up. But intellectual priority is the former concept; publication dates are just an imperfect way to measure it.
In fields where research is routinely disseminated before formal publication (using arXiv, preprints, or conferences), such as mathematics, there are (in my opinion) fewer possibilities for issues such as "X had the idea one year before Y, but Y's paper was published earlier" or "Y was a peer reviewer and scooped X's idea".
Part of the work in a scientific opus is to trace back the origin of the ideas the authors convey. This can be a difficult work, as many sources are barely available, and not always in a known language. Sometimes the original ideas were only eludated to, given away in private communications. It often takes armies of historians to recover the whole story. Think for instance about:
the origin of relativity: Einstein, Poincaré, Lorenz, Young?
the history of the Fast Fourier transform, credited to Cooley and Tuckey, traced back to Gau{ss}, Good, Danielson, Lanczos
least-square regression, based on Cotes, Gauss (again), Laplace
Generally, a date of submission and a date of publication are public information that may stamp a priority, at least a prior date. For clear concepts, it is already complicated, see for instance in this chirplet (a type of of harmonic analysis for radar signals) debate around the first pair of inventors (Mann and Haykin or Mihovilovic and Bracewell).
But in many cases, honesty and deep referencing are guides, as ideas are often unconsciously borrowed and blended. Even a sentence like:
If You Steal From One Author, It’s Plagiarism; If You Steal From Many,
It’s Research
has a debated origin (quote investigator).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.054456 | 2016-03-31T12:47:59 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/66052",
"authors": [
"CodesInChaos",
"Dikran Marsupial",
"Erika Budriene",
"FREY Eales",
"Jim Wong",
"Mangostino",
"Mathematics and MMA",
"Steve Jessop",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/185567",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/185568",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/185569",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/185571",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/185621",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2827",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5666"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
7990 | Status and selectivity of open access journals
I am wondering about the following (after reading this question that discusses open access journals):
Is it easier to publish in one of the open access journals (when compared to the traditional journals)?
Does publishing in one of the open access journals affect the academic value of an article? (Unsure how to put this, but I mean does it affect your reputation etc?)
I note that some of the open access journals are peer-reviewed.
An example of open access is the Directory of Open Access Journals.
We recently had a related discussion here: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7908/value-of-light-to-none-peer-reviewed-pay-to-publish-articles
Open access vs. closed access is a totally separate issue from quality of journal. There are high quality open access journals and low quality ones, and high quality traditional journals and low quality ones. There may be some correlation because open access journals tend to be newer and so less established, but nonetheless if you want to determine the quality of a particular journal you should look at that specific journal not try to extrapolate based on whether it's open access or not.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.054732 | 2013-02-14T00:58:51 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7990",
"authors": [
"Stephan Kolassa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
41944 | At what stage in academia are you most likely to suffer a mental breakdown?
Let's see, just in this week alone I got the news that I have failed four of my midterms (out of five courses in total, the last course doesn't have a midterm), achieving around 40% in each, quite consistent effort across the board. By the way I have around a 3.8 GPA over 4 years of engineering school and I received a letter from the faculty telling me to pull my grade up or consult mental health professional.
I think all this is happening I am in the final stage of wrapping up a year long project that has truly went awry. Two of the members contributed nothing and did not even participate in completing the final system. So I was there to build the entire system myself. This was easy until it was time to deliver our final report. Guess who wrote the 80 pg long final report.
During all this I had one huge McDonald per day at around 1:00 AM, drank a dozen of energy drinks which I know cannot be too good for me. Missed nearly every single lecture. Wrote a 1000 word email to my supervisor detailing how much I suffered through this project and later wrote a 20 word email apologizing for the rambling. Fell sleep in the middle of a lab exercise (thankfully I am able to make up for the lab tomorrow morning). Also rejected from two schools, not my dream school, but hurt nonetheless.
This is the part when I think I would be finally schizophrenic. Like John Nash or that girl in Proof, I go full blown insane. Wear a clown hat on my way to school while swearing at bus drivers, sitting in the middle of a floor in a 7-eleven crying or writing indecipherable symbols on the blackboard. I am not dealing with this stress at all. I have not talked to my professors about the midterms, no plans to make up anything. I have not bothered to pick up the midterms either to check what is wrong.
Surprisingly, none of this has happened. I wonder if I am in a phase that is beyond five stages of grief, or if I have truly given up in my subconscious. Has anyone experienced something similar? Like a setback that is so big that you would think you would run into emotional troubles but nothing wind up happening. At what stage in academia would one most likely to suffer from a break down of some sort?
Your final paragraph starts with none of this has happened. Could you clarify where the true events start and the hypothetical ones start? We all have setbacks, some can be overcome, and some people leave academia. It may be difficult to answer your question.
A tangent: it is definitely (and sadly) true that many smart, hardworking, motivated people like yourself suffer from extreme stress or worse at various points in their education; however, I would caution against thinking that there is a "usual time" for this to happen. It's a short hop-skip-and-jump to the assumption that, if you're not experiencing stress at such a time, you're not working hard enough (if that seems silly, see http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38309/), or conversely that if you are stressed at other times, you're just not good enough. Bad times happen.
You have given more than enough evidence to show that you need to seek professional help and/or counseling. The impulse of telling people that you're in trouble is a good one. Posting anonymously on a site for academic advice is not the way to go: because you clearly need help by those with professional counseling training and very few academics have such training, most people on this site will (and should) decline to give you specific advice. Please seek help in real life. You can begin with student counseling services at your university. If you don't know where to go, google "student counseling [your university]".
Note: I am leaving this as an answer rather than a comment because I feel strongly that this is "the real answer" for the OP. The manner in which probability of mental breakdown varies with the stage of one's academic career is not relevant to the OP. Mental breakdown can happen at all stages of an academic (and nonacademic) career, and rather than looking at age or seniority statistically one should look behaviorally, cognitively and emotionally on a case-by-case basis.
You should not have really taken up the entire work upon yourself!!!
The moment you knew that your contributors were't listening to you and you would have to do the entire work, you should have reported to your professor or lecturer in charge. While you strive day and night with just a burger for a day, your contributors keenly listen to lectures and get ahead of you. My advice to you would be
1)Talk directly to your lecturer/professor about this situation
(face-to face) and seek their help.
2)There is a second chance for everything! Try to focus on your lab
exercises and courses well and level up your grades!
3) Most importantly, Please eat well and sleep well. Only if you are
healthy, you'd be able to catch up.
4)Sometimes, it's better if you share your troubles with someone. You
can talk about it with your friends and even your family members. It
relieves your stress. (It works for me, I can really relate to your
situation-You know, I took step 1) below the moment I had a situation
like yours)
5) Stop worrying. Everything has already happened and you can't do
anything about it. Take a step forward and think about "What you can
do NOW to resolve all these problems!"
In the FUTURE
1) Never have people as contributors who contribute nothing. The
moment you get to foresee that you'd have to end up doing everything,
take a bold decision to do your project alone. (You are the only
contributor for your project so it doesn't matter if you do your
project alone-and why let people take credit for your work?)
2)Keep in touch with your project guide/professor constantly and let
them know the project progress-how much each contributor has
contributed)
3) Please take care of your health (Eat well and don't be demotivated,
no matter what happens. This too shall pass)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.054942 | 2015-03-19T20:03:44 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41944",
"authors": [
"Mykonos",
"Noah Schweber",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118254",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32085"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
54683 | How can I find out if someone really holds a doctoral degree?
We're currently interviewing candidates at my company and I'd like to verify if some of them really have the academic degrees they claim. One in particular claims a doctoral degree from a German university.
I've contacted the university, and the dean wrote back saying that they could not provide this information without the written consent of the individual.
I found this policy rather odd; I would have thought that the granting of a doctoral degree was public information. Is this normal? Is there anything else I can do to find out?
I obtained from the library a copy of the thesis in question but it was in German. I also found through Google a spreadsheet which appears to be a list of dissertations published by that university, but it is unclear whether these are doctoral dissertations or not. The person in question and his dissertation are in that list.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat per request by multiple user flags.
These are doctoral dissertations. There is a search form (de) for the department IFW. All dissertations of the university can be looked up in the TIB/UB (en).
Why does a copy of the thesis not make you happy? If it is officially stored at the library as a part of the PhD contribution, it essentially tells you that its author has a PhD. You might even want to assess the perceived quality of that PhD by reading the thesis. What more proofs do you want?
You could ask the candidate to provide written consent for the university to verify his degree. If he refuses to allow verification of his CV, then he's probably not someone you want to hire, regardless of whether his doctoral degree is legitimate or not.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
It's also common for companies to ask the candidate to ask the university to mail a verification directly to the company (usually a transcript because it's cheaper to print than an actual copy of a degree). I've done it twice myself when applying for a job at large multinational corporations.
In Germany, a strict requirement for doctoral degrees is publishing your thesis. These are called Dissertation; master theses or similar are not. This is the final step of acquiring the degree.
Nowadays this publication can be online (in which case it should be easily findable), but at the very least should be contained in the university’s library. The library in turn should have an online catalogue allowing you to search for works by your candidate and see whether one of them (usually the only one) is categorised as Dissertation, doctoral thesis, Doktorarbeit or similar.
In your particular case, the library maintains a search engine for theses since 2005 and has lists of theses since 1997, both can be found here.
I can imagine that some libraries will tell you over the phone whether they have a thesis by a certain person – this is not private information, as we are talking about a published document and everybody could obtain this information by physically visiting the library.
Getting a thesis listed in those records without actually having a doctoral degree should at the very least require more skill than forging certificates and should be the best proof you can get without asking permission from the candidate to verify the degree. The only exception would be if the candidate lost his PhD, which is however extremely rare and often connected to public attention and also often causes the PhD thesis to be retracted. In any case, also ask for a certificate of all qualifications, as it makes it easier to sue the candidate if it should be forged.
Finally be aware that failing to find a thesis in such a list may have other causes than the person not having a degree. In that case you need to ask the candidate.
Instead of asking for a written consent, as suggested by @AnonymousMathematician, I would recommend to make providing a proof of academic credentials a part of required documents for a job application. That way you will transfer the burden of supporting an application to an applicant, which makes sense by definition and also will save you time and effort. This approach will also reduce the time for an application, since typically graduates are already in possession of proof of their academic credentials, furnished by their educational institution. The proof usually comes in a form of a diploma and/or an official academic transcript and, perhaps, an official conferral letter.
The difficulty I have with this is how to check the documents. Diplomas and transcripts from different universities look radically different, and their appearances even change over the years. If you showed me a fancy-looking document with the name of a university I attended on it, I couldn't reliably tell you whether it was genuine, and I wouldn't have even the slightest idea for other universities. I suppose I could compare with image searches online, but that would give both false positives and false negatives. It's easier to ask the university than to judge the documents myself.
(This raises the question of why official transcripts are usually required for graduate admissions in the U.S., if judging whether a transcript is real is difficult. As far as I understand, the primary goal isn't to combat major dishonesty, such as forging a whole transcript. Instead, the fear is that a much larger fraction of people would commit lesser dishonesty, such as "accidentally" mistyping one or two grades if they reported their own grades, emboldened by the fact that nobody could prove it was intentional. Official transcripts avoid this temptation.)
@AnonymousMathematician I think the point is to make the applicant ask the university to send the official transcript to the company.
@MarchHo: Yes, that would work better (although it conflicts with the sentence "This approach will also reduce the time for an application, since typically graduates are already in possession of proof of their academic credentials, furnished by their educational institution.").
@AnonymousMathematician: You raise a valid point. My (perhaps, a bit naive) rationale was that it is highly unlikely that an applicant would go as far as submitting a fake document, considering 1) how easy is to compare the image with a known valid one and 2) how easy is to verify the legitimacy of the document with its originator and, finally, 3) how serious could be reputation, career and/or legal consequences of forging such document. You're correct in catching the conflict in my answer: unlike March Ho's assumption, my point was to shorten the application process by avoiding extra steps.
I like the idea of asking applicants to provide proof, but I also share Anonymous Mathematician's objection. As far as I'm concerned, a necessary condition for something to qualify as proof is that it came through channels not accessible to the applicant.
@DavidZ: As I said above, that point is valid, in general. However, extrapolating your logic, you're saying that, every time when an official or an organization needs to see your proof of ID, they would need to request a copy of your ID (i.e., residence card or passport) from official channels directly. Sounds to me like not a very feasible solution...
@AleksandrBlekh that extrapolation is entirely valid. The check could be done electronically - I think police do this when they pull people over for speeding, for example. But in any case, my point would be that most times when people check your ID, they are not actually proving that it is your ID. One may then question whether lindelhof wants proof, or merely to raise the barrier to getting a fake credential accepted.
@DavidZ: I agree and think we understand each other pretty well. Based on context, term "proof" has different interpretations - from formal (paper or electronic) document proof to just reducing chances of fraud.
@AnonymousMathematician "If you showed me a fancy-looking document with the name of a university I attended on it, I couldn't reliably tell you whether it was genuine" If you showed me a fancy-looking document from my university, I'd know it was a fake... Cambridge gives out some cheap looking PhD certificates...
My proof of undergrad studies is the bank receipt from having paid the title (good luck convincing other people that is true!); the fancy looking paper (bigger than an A3, BTW, so difficult to scan) will take a few years. I guess I could get a provisional certificate, but I would have to request it in person, wait a few weeks for them to decide to print it, and go again to pick it up.
@AleksandrBlekh in Sweden, all ID have the phone of the issuing body printed on them for verification. A more practical approach is what Cambridge does for the language certificates: a paper with a Cambridge URL where the information is copied.
@Davidmh: Thank you for your comments. My Ph.D. diploma is also in A3 or so format, which is rather inconvenient, to say the least. I agree that the Cambridge's approach you've mentioned is indeed much better (in many regards, for all sides of potential transactions - convenience, cost savings, security, etc.)
In Germany "dissertation" is always the path to a Doktor grade which is equivalent to the PhD. The dissertation must be published in Germany (which is one expensive part if done in paper), so it is publicly available.
The dissertation can be and was often written in German, so no surprise. Because of the prevalence of English in the natural sciences, English dissertations are more and more common in this fields. It is also normal that Germany has extremely strict privacy.
To your question: Yes, he has a doctor/PhD degree.
In the general case:
a) Look out for the title of the dissertation and the university in the CV. If this information is missing, request it. Once you have this information (and there is no reason to refuse it), look up if the "university" is in fact a diploma mill or something suspicious ("The Great University of Melanesia").
b) Look up the dissertation which should be publicly available and google for the instituition. Mills and unsavory institutes will be found easily because they are advertising their "services". Contact the university which will likely provide you with the information if the candidate has the given grade (for other countries).
c) If you are savvy in your field and you can understand the dissertation, you could ask what the candidate has found out in the dissertation. Even for a diploma (Master) I could roughly describe what I did (do not expect formulas from me). This will expose people who used a ghostwriter (there are many politicians in Germany who were forced to resign after it was exposed that they "bought" their grade).
It's also more and more common to have the abstract of a dissertion in english and german.
I wonder if there are cases where the library holds a copy of the dissertation even though no degree was awarded: for example if the dissertation was accepted but the degree was refused for reasons such as non-payment of fees.
@MichaelKay: In Germany, you usually do not even have to be registered as a student when doing a doctorate, so it is fully possible there are no fees. When there are, these are usually collected by the "university secretariate", which tends to be unrelated to the "exam office" that watches over preconditions for certificates.
@MichaelKay: the Geman universities I know are extremely practical in that respect: they start the procedure for awarding the PhD (including review/grading of the thesis, defense, etc) only after they received the fee (there is a fee for the burocratic procedure regardless whether you are a student of the university or not). Likewise, IIRC I got the forms for handing the thesis over to the university library only after passing the defense - actually, the committee may ask for changes/corrections in the defense, so the final version is typically produced as 2nd last step, ...
... once the library certifies that you did do that, you can actually go and get your certificate.
@cbeleites: "there is a fee for the burocratic procedure regardless whether you are a student of the university or not" - really? I never had to pay anything other than the regular administration fees for enrolled students, and I never heard about any of my colleagues who chose not to enrol for their doctorate having to pay a fee of any sorts.
@O.R.Mapper: see e.g. FSU Jena https://www.uni-jena.de/unijenamedia/Downloads/faculties/bio_pharm/promotion/Geb%C3%BChrenordnung.pdf (§7 Prüfungsgebühren). But of course, each university (faculty?) has their own Promotionsordnung and Gebührenordnung, so it is quite possible that the universities you know have no fees as well.
To expand on previous answers:
In this particular case, the Institute in question provides a list of all PhD theses (Doktorarbeiten/Dissertationen) on their webpage:
http://www.ifw.uni-hannover.de/ifw-dissertationen.html
In Germany it is indeed common to prove your degree via a sheet of paper the university gives you and not by people calling up the university.
But shouldn't it be obvious from the references (you did get an academic reference, no ?) if the candidate has a PhD ?
Could you elaborate on how the presence of an academic reference would prove a specific degree?
"We're currently interviewing candidates at my company and I'd like to verify if some of them really have the academic degrees they claim."
Have the applicant provide a scan of his diploma.
"I've contacted the university, and the dean wrote back saying that they could not provide this information without the written consent of the individual. I found this policy rather odd."
It's normal. It's not their business to meet your requests. Plus who cares what you find odd--there are probably many parts of the world that don't make sense to you--tough.
"I obtained from the library a copy of the thesis in question but it was in German."
Sounds pretty good to me. Can't you skim it? English and German are rather similar. Does it have any figures? Plus it's just sitting there--you think the library filed a fraudulent copy? How would that change if in English? If you really want to be a sooper detective, just get a few pages translated. But honestly...this seems odd (on your end).
"I also found through Google a spreadsheet which appears to be a list of dissertations published by that university, but it is unclear whether these are doctoral dissertations or not. The person in question and his dissertation are in that list."
Sounds good. How certain do you need to be? First you have the assertion of the applicant (which should count for a lot--many places would just take that), then you have all these other positive indicators. But if you want more, have the kid scan his diploma. But really, your level of suspicion is "odd". If I were an applicant and you showed me this behavior, I would reject you and move on to other opportunities.
Agreed, it sounds fishy. But standards varying the way they do, not just between countries but also within them, I would not set much stock by the title as far as presumably implied competence is concerned - you always need to assess that independently.
However, even if you are satisfied that the candidate will be able to do the job, you still do not want someone who would fib on their CV. Oh no.
I would find someone who speaks German (well, actually I would not have to) and is also competent in the field and ask them what they make of it.
I found this policy rather odd; I would have thought that the granting
of a doctoral degree was public information. Is this normal?
Answer:
nothing requires a university to release this information upon request
to anyone who asks, and in practice, many universities will require
consent (and maybe a fee) in order to release it.
Meaning, they do it for money, which while is a hassle for you, is brilliant on their part.
-1. I am pretty sure German universities do not ask for a fee to release private information. They just protect it, until authorization is provided to release it.
@QuoraFeans The 2 upvoters of my comment seem to disagree Also how is holding a degree private information? :P
The two downvoters on your answer seem to disagree with you.
In the US, they charge for this. Not aware of that happening in Europe.
Data protection law in the UK would (or should) prevent a UK university from disclosing any information they have about a student without permission from the student. I am a UK citizen so I have experience of this. I am also aware that German data protection laws are generally more strict than those of the UK. Whether they charge or not, they are forbidden from issuing information which regarded as the property of the individual it is about, without the consent on the individual.
The second quoted passage was taken from a comment made by me and since removed by moderators. It can still be seen on chat. (I guess the link marked "Answer" leading to that comment was intended as attribution, but now that the comment has been deleted, the passage lacks attribution to me.) In the original context (not included here), I made clear that I was only speaking about practices in the US. I make no claim that this sentence is applicable to Germany.
I would also like to add that the inference made by BCLC, that such university policies are primarily motivated by money, is solely BCLC's own. That is not my opinion and I did not intend to imply it.
@BCLC How is holding a degree not private information? You think everybody wants anybody to know they have a degree in Nuclear Physics? Germany has strong privacy protection laws, including if you attend a university or which grade you have been given.
@Chris Grades I understand but I don't quite see why holding a degree is private information. Graduation ceremonies and candidates for graduation are often made for the public to see. Have you seen or heard of the TV series Suits?
@BCLC You don't have to attend the graduation ceremony, the same way, you don't have to publish your degrees on LinkedIn. You are right, though, that technically anyone could monitor the public announcements regarding who is going to be examined for their degree, however, the actual decision isn't made publicly as far as I know.
@Chris Information made public is therefore not private. Is that wrong? Or inapplicable in this scenario? Again, have you seen or heard of the TV series suits?
@BCLC it's going into a direction we should probably be having in a chat-room. The only way to migrate there is to keep posting here, though ... how funny
or to create one: http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/36988/degree-privacy
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.055501 | 2015-09-20T17:31:20 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/54683",
"authors": [
"Alaa",
"Aleksandr Blekh",
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"BCLC",
"Chris",
"David O'Connor",
"David Z",
"Davidmh",
"Joel",
"March Ho",
"Michael Kay",
"Mufti",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Netzila Technologies",
"Nirawat Puechpian",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Oleg Lobachev",
"Quora Feans",
"Srisht",
"TafT",
"Willem Röpke",
"cbeleites",
"cforcomputer",
"cfr",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12391",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149372",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149373",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149374",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149386",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149451",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149452",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149465",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149487",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149491",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149547",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149574",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18064",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/182323",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/236",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23999",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25148",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26713",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30852",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39478",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41448",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41511",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7971",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8970",
"killervoid",
"mart",
"niveK akninblarg",
"red_middle",
"shay2017",
"slebetman",
"xehpuk",
"zfeng"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
81851 | Dismissed from PhD program and reapplying; how to answer question about dismissal?
My story is that the research in my department did not match with my background. I worked hard and my GPA is 3.5+, but the research topic was hard to develop. Unfortunately, I was dismissed from the program but was approved to get a master's degree before I leave the university. I do not have any misconduct.
Now I am applying to another PhD program which could be a good match with my research interest. However, I am facing a question from most universities that I am applying to.
The questions is:
"Have you ever been expelled, dismissed, suspended or otherwise
subject to disciplinary sanction by(at or from) any college or
university".
I need to select yes or no.
In my case, it is not a disciplinary sanction. I was dismissed from the PhD program only due to misfit in research. I stayed at the university for my Master's degree and I was not dismissed directly from the university. As an international student, I am not quite sure how to answer this question.
I am nervous about this application. Can anyone help me figure out how to deal with this issue in a proper way?
Thank you so much!
The three answers provided are all correct. The solution the department came up with was a graceful exit. Now, take it with grace, with your head held high. All the best for your future studies!
Were you dismissed (i.e. did they kick you out), or did you withdraw on your own (or, say, did they just say change your curriculum from Doctoral to Master's and then graduate you normally)? I expect this should not be ambiguous at all; it should be quite obvious since you would have to be the one filing for withdrawal or graduation.
@Mehrdad At first I was placed on academic probation, and was given a grace period to push my research. The policy was if my work during grace period satisfies my advisor, then I can continue, otherwise I will be dismissed from the PhD program. Since it was a misfit, I did not want to continue, so I wanted to withdraw, but the department still gave me a letter which said I was dismissed from the PhD program. Then I was approved to switch to the master program, take master coursework and graduate with a master degree normally.
@Alex123456: Wow, that's way more tricky than I thought. I think that paragraph should be included in your question. It honestly sounds like you were dismissed from the Ph.D., but I'm no expert in this matter. I would be hesitant to follow everyone else's advice, since you got an official letter saying you were dismissed. Perhaps go ask a counselor/registrar at the school that gave you the latter and explain & ask them? I'd make sure to get back something in writing if they say you weren't dismissed, just to cover your butt in case someone later accuses you of lying.
@Mehrdad Yeah, that is the most tricky part. Seems that other answerers think that though I was dismissed from the PhD program, it is not the same dismissal case that the university admission question is asking. But on the other hand, I am worrying that we are not 100% sure whether the university asks this question only to identify misconducts, or they regard the dismissal as any kind of dismissal even including PhD dismissal. It could be helpful to ask a counselor in my department. Thank you for your suggestion.
@Alex123456: You're welcome! One note: just make sure you ask someone who has some authority on the matter. I can only guess who this might be, but my guess is that this would have to be someone at the university level, not at a departmental level -- not just because that's what the question asks, but because I would expect that if this were to be ever verified, the person whom would be asked this question would be someone in the university administration. Possibly the registrar? I'm not sure. But e.g. your research adviser or ombudsperson would probably be the wrong person to ask.
@aparente001 Thank you for your kind word. Due to my special situation and the unclear question, different people have different understanding. I think a better way might be asking the director in my college.
@Alex123456 - Good idea, this will give you peace of mind.
I feel ya man. I had to flunk out of a few things in the past simply because it was a bad match for my knowledge set (Ie the machine learning course that presumed a level of math waaaaay above my arts degree having butt). Tell them what happened and that it was nothing to do with your capacity to handle the load it was simply the wrong guy/gal in the wrong program, and if they have any doubts point them at your previous supervisor.
I just wanted to take a moment to bring up something that I think will help from a non-academic standpoint: I feel you should stop using the word "misfit" as it has a negative connotation with it, I would say it was a "bad fit" or "misaligned", but misfit (at least in American English) typically means that you're a troublemaker
The fact that you were not allowed to continue toward the Ph.D. is not "dismissal" in the sense that that question means. (I can certainly see how the terminology could be confusing though.) The question is there to identify students who have been involved in academic (or other) misconduct. Academic failure does not fall into the misconduct category, so you should answer "No" to the question. Doing so will not imperil your application in any way.
That's correct. A student could be dismissed or expelled if he or she didn't maintain a certain grade point average, or stopped attending or registering for classes.
Thank you for your answer. I am also wondering the purpose of universities to ask this question. If we are pretty sure that the question is only to identify students who have misconduct, then my case of PhD dismissal does not belong to this category. But since finally I still received PhD program dismissal, as the question includes "dismiss", will the university admission officer consider that I did not tell the truth if I answer "No"?
The question is meant to catch people with some kind of academic misconduct on their record. If somebody lies about it, the university can kick them out of the program if they do manage to find out, since they lied on their application.
@Buzz I see. But I have an official letter from the department chair which states that I was dismissed from the PhD program. As different people may have different understanding on this "dismissal", I think it might be risky to answer "no", if somebody in the future know that I have a PhD dismissal history and then accuse me of lying in the application. Next week I will ask an official person in my college for further suggestions. Thank you very much!
Obtain a copy of your transcript. It should say there whether you were dismissed or expelled. To be on the safe side, you should ask your former advisor.
At my program, a few students who we do not have confidence in might be asked to leave the program prior to advancing to candidacy. If they've passed their quals, they can leave with a MA if the department approves it.
This is a mutually agreed form of separation in lieu of the proceedings for formal expulsion so it does not count as a dismissal.
Thank you RoboKaren. Since I successfully switched to the master program, on my current transcript there is no "dismiss" or "expel". My department said after I finish this master's degree, on my final version of transcript, it will say "the student withdrew the PhD after he/she received master's degree". I think my case is a mutually agreed form of separation, as both my advisor and myself think that we are not matched and it could be good for me to stop the research that I don't like and find a better match.
@Alex123456: That is a crucial point, and I think you should edit your question to take out the word "dismissed". According to the official record, you weren't dismissed; you withdrew. That makes it absolutely clear that you should answer the question "no".
This is simple. Your answer to their question should be NO. The question they are asking is designed to identify people who have a history of misconduct, and whose past institutions have taken action against them. Your situation has nothing to do with that. You were not invited to continue on to the PhD, because of the lack of research fit. This is not the same thing as being expelled, dismissed, suspended, or any other situation involving disciplinary action.
"Expelled" and "dismissed" aren't restricted to cases of misconduct; they can also happen because of failure to make satisfactory academic progress.
@NateEldredge In this case the question itself states that it is asking for past disciplinary actions taken. As OPs dismissal was not disciplinary, this question should be answered with a no. The place to bring up this dismissal would be if it is brought up in a letter or email after the application, or during an interview setting if the question itself is brought up.
Lets parse your question:
1) As the above respondents have indicated your answer to that particular question should be no.
2) Let's dwell on why and how. In Physics for example,there are two broad types of departments. Those that are very difficult to get in, but once you are in and you don't have a major league screw up, you generally will complete a Phd. At the other end of the spectrum, a department will let in a bunch and then do the screening at the qualifier exam allowing the people who didn't pass the qual to get a terminal master and move on.
3) Typically again in physics, it's possible to get a master's from passing the qual and transfer to a department which has a strong program in your area of interest.
The tradeoff in grad school is finding an available professor whose Phd subject you like the most. Most people are not that picky because to transfer lengthens the time in grad school, plus you have a whole new set of departmental politics to bone up on. The thinking here is that you might have some wiggle room on the topic area when you do a postdoc or your 1st Phd job.
Here is my grad school advice to you.
In general you are not just picking a research topic but also a thesis professor. There are three general attributes in picking a professor:
They work in a topic area that you like, they have funding to support you, and you can get along or work with this professor. I think a grad student is fortunate to find a professor that meets 2 out of 3 of the above.
This... doesn't actually answer the question other than to say "I agree with the other answers that say 'no'" before going on an off-topic expose about choosing graduate programs....
To be more specific and to the point that @RoddyoftheFrozenPeas : Comments are restricted to those who have 50+ reputation. Try asking questions of your own, or answering questions of others with real answers mind you
Changing graduate programs is a very serious decision. The fact that this person had to come here to ask a simple paperwork question says a lot. Did they not have a professor, grad adviser, or senior grad student that they could talk to? What is the the "underlying issue" is very relevant.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.057182 | 2016-12-18T18:01:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81851",
"authors": [
"Alex123456",
"Buzz",
"NZKshatriya",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Piedmont",
"Roddy",
"Shayne",
"Taegost",
"aparente001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1201",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2708",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27112",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27515",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5711",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58641",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63231",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66585",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66633",
"mkennedy",
"user541686"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
134582 | Do I have to cite common CS algorithms?
I'm working on my final thesis for a CS grade course and I want to use a common sorting algorithm (quicksort for the curious ones). Do I need to include a reference to this algorithm (cite or quote)? Or it is so common that I don't need to? Take into accout that it was first published on 1961 and it is extremely used and known by almost anyone in the CS world.
It is really up to you (and your advisor perhaps). In any case, chasing down the reference for quicksort, and even some of the quite voluminous bibliography on it's analysis, isn't that much work, and a handful of references will hardly lead to overrunning any maximal page count...
What does "use" mean in this context? Are you writing a program, or just describing the algorithm itself?
Does it matter what particular algorithm is used, or is the important point the fact that your data gets sorted somehow?
If you need to cite a specific thing (e.g. a lemma used in the original proof of correctness/complexity for example) then definitely cite it no matter how well known it is. If you are simply defining a new algorithm and one step is "sort this array using quicksort" then a citation may not be needed (in fact at this point you may consider just saying something like "sort the array using any O(n logn) algorithm" if you don't have more specific requirements about the sorting algorithm).
@Abigail it depends if you end up referencing 200 algorithms or not
Whatever you decide, make sure you cite this stackexchange article for justification ;)
If you're doing college homework, the only real answer is to ask your instructor -- this isn't an actual academic paper, so the rules for grading are up to them.
Just cite a classic book on Algorithms which explains quicksort (almost every book does contain a section on Sorting Algorithms)
Do I have to cite common CS algorithms?
No.
The fact that it was first published [in] 1961 isn't relevant, you needn't cite it because it is [widely] used and [well-]known by almost anyone in the CS world.
That said, although a citation isn't necessary, you can provide one at your discretion. Such a citation is probably more important for a final thesis than for an academic publication, since it may be considered important for students to demonstrate they can cite.
Beyond citing the original source, you may like to cite your favourite textbook(s) on the topic (rather than citing the entire volume, reference a particular section, e.g., \cite[Chapter 4.3]{Textbook} in LaTeX).
In particular, it could be worthwhile to cite the relevant chapter of Introduction to algorithms by CLRS.
I was told that citing a textbook is "unprofessonal", that a "professional" article should always cite a research article or a monograph. Not sure I buy that, but at the time I had to change the citation.
@sds Eh. I think one should look at the purpose of the citation. I don't think there's anything wrong with citing textbooks from other fields (e.g., I'm a computer scientist and have cited textbooks from mathematics), or where you need some obscure detail that's presented in one (I've cited Knuth for a specific fact about the performance of hash tables). The problem comes when you're citing a textbook for something that's common knowledge and, there, the problem is more that you're citing at all, rather than that you're citing a textbook.
@sds Following the previous comment one should look at the purpose of the citation: Sources beyond the original manuscript can offer additional insights which are useful to the reader. You may even choose to signpost such sources, e.g., "Knuth summarises topic X and provides a detailed performance analysis."
@Basile What's the point of such a citation? I mean every self respecting computer scientist will have read CLRS and have a copy in reach, so what value is it adding to the paper? If you can point to any specific detail that's important, sure, but just a "hey I used quicksort and as everyone here knows you can look it up in that book" seems unnecessary.
@sds I have cited textbooks in a paper and the paper got in to a good conference. None of the reviewers said anything. That's just one data point, but citing a textbook when required is definitely not unprofessional.
@Voo If you read my whole answer, I explain. It is also explained in comments above.
I agree with most of the body of your text, but - you're reaching the wrong conclusion with it...
@einpoklum Your comment seems useful, but isn't... #reviewerTwo
@user2768: See my own answer.
@user2768 You say he shouldn't and then backpedal with "you can provide one at your discretion" and say you could include it in a final thesis, because it demonstrates that a student can cite. But nowhere do you name an actual good reason for why it would improve the actual paper to include the reference, which is what I'm wondering about.
@Voo I say you don't have to, not you shouldn't; I don't back-pedal. I name an actual good reason [for citing] e.g because it demonstrates that a student can cite. I'm unsure what you're wondering about; your comment seems to address your concerns. (My answer doesn't explain why citing textbooks is useful, comments do e.g https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134582/do-i-have-to-cite-common-cs-algorithms/134585?noredirect=1#comment358595_134585 & https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134582/do-i-have-to-cite-common-cs-algorithms/134585?noredirect=1#comment358598_134585.)
@Voo "I mean every self respecting computer scientist will have read CLRS and have a copy in reach"
You should also consider students or recent graduates. Also not everyone is American or can afford to buy expensive foreign textbooks.
If the specific use of the algorithm is important to the work, then you should cite what specifically you used or implemented, and also citing the broadest/oldest class of algorithms would be strictly optional. Using the example of quicksort, there are many dozens of varieties of it that have the same general idea but have different characteristics and performance. If you used the 1961 paper as a reference for your implementation, then of course you would cite it. If you used the Java or C++ sort function (which are different and have changed between versions - mergesort, timsort, hybrid, etc.), you would just say so and don't need to hunt down what that was based on.
On the other hand, if sorting is not an important part of the work (it matters only that it was sorted, not how you sorted it), it is common and accepted not to bother citing every last little detail like this. In most cases how something was sorted is so unimportant that it isn't even mentioned in text at all, but of course if your work is on sorting algorithms (and in a thesis) you should be more detailed and cite liberally.
As this is not for a conference but for a thesis, and possibly part of a graded course, you should probably just cite it anyway, possibly both the original and whatever source you actually used for reference (textbook, code library, whatever). Especially at the less-than-PhD level, instructors are much more likely to prefer heavy use of citations, and I've known many professors to ding for lack of citation of things that one would not bother to mention or cite in an actual paper.
Cool answer also. I understood that this topic is a lot about context, nature and audience of the publication.
This is the best answer I've seen. Regarding the second paragraph, I think omitting any citation when you only care that something is sorted (or analogous other outputs) is reasonable insomuch as it's obvious that sorting is possible. If it's not obvious that a particular arrangement you need can be obtained from an arbitrary input, you should cite the result that proved that it is possible.
Note: Java's standard sorting implementation used by most of its sorting methods is timsort since Java 7. Before that, it used to be mergesort.
@VictorStafusa Ah, mergesort, my memory failed me, thanks for the correction!
"Quicksort" today rarely refers to the 1961 version; the algorithm has been improved since then. If you're going to cite, you should of course cite something that's relevant to your thesis. As others stated, if you just needed an algorithm to get things sorted, that doesn't need citing. But if your thesis did depend on the details of sorting, then is suddenly becomes important to cite, and cite right.
I'll take what appears to be a surprisingly contrarian position on this:
Yes, you need to cite the implementation you used, in a scientific paper.
It is far too common that scientists working elsewhere trying to reproduce results fail to do so, and waste a lot of time trying to make sure their setups and steps are just the same as what they're trying to replicate. Too often, the issue comes down to a particular bug in a software package that one lab or the other is using, or a different choice in an implementation detail nobody knew mattered. By citing the specific implementation you used, including the version number of packages where available, you can eliminate a potential source of frustration (and/or false fraud accusations!), at relatively little additional cost when writing. (Note that sometimes, that "other lab" may be a future you!)
If you are using a quick implementation found online, citation may also be required by the license on the source. For example, you could say "I used the Java implementation of Quicksort found at https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Algorithm_Implementation/Sorting/Quicksort&oldid=3562350#Java" (note use of the "oldid" parameter to tie to a specific version; click View History and then the latest date to get that in the URL). That attribution is arguably required by the license; similar story for what you find on Stack Overflow.
This also provides a means of credit for those who may have spent a lot of time (that they could have spent on something else) writing a software package that is useful for the broader community. The credit aspect is probably more important for academic developers than commercial ones. In those cases, there may be a paper announcing or describing the package, which you can and should cite for this purpose.
No, if the algorithm has a well-known name that means that it is assumed that you are not the author and that readers can get familiar by using that name as a reference. In a similar way when you are writing a math paper, you don't need to create a reference every time you use terms like Hamel basis, Lagrangian, Gaussian distribution, Fourier transform, etc., because it is well known like QuickSort, TimSort, simplex method... using a specific name is enough reference for the reader.
I was just thinking about this the other day. What one person considers "well-known" or common knowledge, isn't so for another person. QuickSort is a great example. Most people who have studied any computer science would know it. However, the average person on the street wouldn't. For example the person at the grocery store checkout probably wouldn't. So when deciding to cite something as a reference, does it come down to if it's considered "common knowledge" given the topic of the work?
"Every time"? No, just the first time. Certainly in a thesis. See my answer.
Isn't the name itself a reference? If I say Fourier Transform everyone would know that I don't get a credit for that and the name is a reference to the formula/work that everyone can find out easily (even more than having a link to a paper from 1800s)
@Celeritas "common knowledge" within the target audience of the paper. Whether an academic paper is properly cited for, or even meaningful to, most grocery store checkout staff is not an interesting question.
Do I have to cite common CS algorithms?
Generally, and in a thesis, yes.
Why?
You may consider it common, others may not; not everyone is in the same sub-field of Computer Science.
You may be using a variant of the algorithm which is less ubiquitous; or a specific implementation, as @WBT suggests.
If you're using terms from the definition or specification of the algorithm, it may be useful for the reader to have access to some textbook for reference/inspiration/whatever.
Actually, it's rarely a bad idea to find an excuse to refer to a nice textbook. Pick a good one!
It's a thesis, it's not as though your pressed for space or anything.
Better to err on the side of caution with citations.
Specifically for quicksort - mmm, maybe not, can't say for sure; depends on the specifics.
If your results depend on some property of the quicksort algorithm, for example on its typical or worst-case performance, then you should cite a paper that demonstrates that the algorithm has those properties. For example if you deliberately chose an algorithm that works well when the data is already sorted, it might be best to cite some paper that compares sorting algorithms and demonstrates that quicksort is a good choice in this scenario. (I don't recall whether that's actually true, it's just an example).
If any sorting algorithm would do, then you don't really need to justify your choice; indeed, you don't really need to say what algorithm you chose.
Personally I don't think you need to cite a paper that explains what QuickSort is; it's more relevant to cite something that explains why it was the right choice for your particular application.
In case of quicksort, everything depends on how the pivot is choosen. Most of the implementations I've saw have some pathological cases that makes it vulnerable to O(n^2) behaviour. A frequent case of those is when the list is already sorted. A simple case that defeats many of the naiver defenses against O(n^2) is when the list consists solely of a bunch of repetitions of a single element.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.058259 | 2019-08-12T14:10:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/134582",
"authors": [
"0xfede7c8",
"Basile Starynkevitch",
"BrianH",
"Celeritas",
"CodesInTheDark",
"David Richerby",
"Giacomo Alzetta",
"IEatBagels",
"Martin Bonner supports Monica",
"R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE",
"Victor Stafusa",
"Voo",
"einpoklum",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10516",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108844",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111803",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111816",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15828",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19385",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23316",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38135",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42724",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49970",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/532",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57749",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5829",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67694",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6787",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74293",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96358",
"isarandi",
"jamesqf",
"knzhou",
"pip install frisbee",
"sds",
"seteropere",
"shaneb",
"user2768",
"vonbrand",
"xuq01"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
10733 | What to do (years later) with otherwise good student who has accidentally plagiarised part of PhD thesis?
Here's a not so hypothetical situation. International student x is very talented but comes from a background where technical writing is not taught or understood very well. She writes a great thesis with a good literature review and nice results. However, the results are based on two key papers from previous students in the group. She decides to give credit to the papers in a special chapter, which she starts by saying "I need to give credit to this and that paper" and proceeds with copying paragraphs wholesale to describe what those other students did.
This was a few years back; X is now faculty at a good school and she contacts me (past advisor) in teary-terrified voice to let me know that she plagiarized in her thesis. I am now in a panic as well. How could I miss those? And how could she do that?? We both risk losing our jobs, and she is at risk of losing her degree as well (which, by the way, was a very strong thesis with a good number of top journal publications).
As far as I know there's no process for revising a thesis after it's been submitted and I don't know what else to do short of turning ourselves in - which I feel morally obligated to do.
Please advise.
Edit
Thanks all for weighing in on this. I spent the night going through the thesis and there appear to be three more sources that are suspect of being plagiarized, all in the same wretched chapter; one is a thesis of a colleague, the other is a textbook and the third is a book I wrote a while back. So this is more serious than I thought.
She has unfortunately not used quotes for the material, i.e., instead of saying "[paper i] says «this and that»," she just went on with "[paper i] says this and that."
She has not been accused of plagiarism by anybody. I am guessing that she has finally come to grips with good writing standards and upon looking through her thesis she realized that her "summary" was actually plagiarism. I have every reason to believe that she did what she did in good faith (she has proven her honesty on many occasions).
Perhaps there is some form of mechanism for adding errata or clarifications to a thesis? Googling "errata phd thesis" results in quite a few such documents.
Bitwise, thanks for looking this up. I feel that errata would probably be acceptable if it were for only a few words or equations. Not sure about doing an erratum for a lot of material.
Any text which is attributed is not plagiarism. If I write, 'John Smith wrote ""', then is not plagiarism. What is going on here is alleged plagiarism. Fight the allegations. Find out how they are substantiated and strike at those arguments. Simple as that.
what makes her -after few years- think that she plagiarised? I can't see the plagiarism.
Ideally, what is needed here is to obtain a version of the paper from the accusers which is properly annotated with clear indications where the alleged plagiarisms occur, down to the starting and ending word of each one. Each one should be given a number or identifier, and then discussed in attached notes. There should be one final version of this annotated paper which everyone involved signs off on, so that the accusations of plagiarism are not an unfair, moving target. Then the instances of alleged plagiarism can be dealt with calmly on a case-by-case basis.
Do you have any reasons to assume it was in good faith (e.g. verbatim instead of 'in own words' of an otherwise cited material, because of lack of exposure to the contemporary culture of scientific writing)? Are the plagiarized people aware of it? If so, what is there stance?
Thanks all for weighing in on this. I spent the night going through the thesis and there appear to be three more sources that are suspect of being plagiarized, all in the same wretched chapter; one is a thesis of a colleague, the other is a textbook and the third is a book I wrote a while back. So this is more serious than I thought.
So, I know this isn't very constructive, but .. As you say, how did you miss this? You read your student's thesis and didn't notice material plagiarized from your own book? I mean, I'd think you might recognize the work of your colleauge or 'other students in the group', but your own work ... Did you actually read the thesis before it was submitted?
Out of curiosity, how did the tale end?
I think this happens much more often than people (with English mother-tongue) realize. Most students, especially from Asia, don't even realize that it is something considered wrong in the US. I am saying this based on experience of 10+ years at Far-Eastern higher education, before someone would like to label me racist.
I'm confused why "Bob says the sky is blue." is career-ruining plagiarism but "Bob says 'The sky is blue'." is an honest innocent attribution. Both make it pretty clear whose idea the blueness of the sky is. Was this really the entire story?
This is common enough that someone has written Important Tips On Writing An Apology Letter For Plagiarism
The second to last paragraph is unclear; the two things looks the same to me. Maybe because you're quoting quotes?
Did any of the plagiarized material make it into journal papers, or was it all literature review that was never published outside of the thesis?
If some of it made it into papers, then it's important to contact the journals and publish corrections. This is more straightforward and predictable than dealing with the thesis itself. If the plagiarism is confined to background material, then I don't think retracting the papers would be necessary. Instead, I expect it would be possible to publish a correction that indicates the plagiarized portions and provides citations. This would be embarrassing and would hurt her reputation a little, but it would solve the problem as far as the papers were concerned. It would also strengthen the student's case for dealing with the thesis if she can say she voluntarily corrected the publications and did not need to retract any of them.
If none of the plagiarized material was published elsewhere, then it's trickier. Once all the original results are published in research papers, I doubt anyone will read the thesis and discover the plagiarism. Even if they do, they might take pity on the student and ignore the plagiarism. (I once ignored some mild plagiarism of my writing in the background sections of a thesis at another university. The student had already graduated, and I found no evidence of plagiarism in any of his research papers. If I knew for sure he could just file a correction to the thesis, then that would make sense, but I wouldn't want to potentially destroy his career over this mistake.) So she might well get away with it if she doesn't say anything. Still, I'd advise her to officially confess to the university. Turning herself in is likely to lead to a much better outcome than being caught by someone else. Plus it's the right thing to do, and it will save her from years of worrying about getting caught.
We both risk losing our jobs, and she is at risk of losing her degree as well (which, by the way, was a very strong thesis with a good number of top journal publications).
Unless your university is extraordinarily strict, I don't think your job is in jeopardy. On the other hand, the student's degree or job might be, depending on how the university handles the situation. Based on your description, I think it would be unfair for her career to be ruined, but I can't predict what will actually happen. I hope your administration's sense of fairness is the same as mine, in which case a correction will suffice.
The hardest situation will be if she decides to remain silent. In that case you probably have an obligation to turn her in, and it would look terrible if anyone found out that you knew but didn't say anything. On the other hand, turning her in would be a tough decision. Much better for her to turn herself in voluntarily.
Good points, Anonymous Mathematician. The plagiarism was limited to background information. None of the material made it into publications. It really wasn't the literature review (which she did in earnest), but the chapter after the literature review, where she specifically cited the initial papers on the topic. I agree that coming clean is the only thing to do and realistically her thesis is very strong otherwise. I would just hate to see her career ruined since she did very well as a PI so far.
First off, just to make it clear, this is plagiarism. Providing a reference and then long string of text implies that the text is YOUR description of ideas of someone ELSE. To give full credit to someone else requires some sort of formatting distinction (typically block indentation or quotation makes). Potentially the plagiarism was accidental, but it is still plagiarism.
Supervisor
A doctoral dissertation is generally a single author piece of independent work. Plagiarism in a dissertation should have little direct impact on the career of the supervisor. It might have some indirect consequences like people questioning how you can be so unfamiliar with your students work that you do not catch plagiarism, but I think most people would be pretty understanding about this. If the thesis was not single author or if the work was published with your name on it, that is a different story since co-authorship implies you have BOTH plagiarized.
Failure to report academic misconducted (whether it is your student or not) can impact your career. At my university we do not classify failure of a student to report academic misconducted of another student as academic misconducted. I don't know the disciplinary process when faculty are involved. Personally, I would say that we all have a responsibility to the scientific process to report ALL cases of academic misconduct that we are aware of.
Student
At my University, the penalty for plagiarism by a current student is zero on the piece of work. This would mean the student would have failed her dissertation. As a department we would deem this penalty too severe and push that she would be able to re-submit a new dissertation that reuses the non-plagiarized material. The University would push back and ask for a completely independent dissertation. I have never experienced this with a PhD student, but this occurs regularly with our final year undergraduates and about 70% of the time the student is allowed to reuse the non-plagiarized material.
I don't know what would happen if the plagiarism was found after the degree was given. My guess is the University would have to retract the dissertation from the library and any electronic database. They may revoke the degree, but they could also look at other work and count those towards the dissertation.
The current university may try and fire or penalize her, but this seems harsh compared to the typical penalty of plagiarism in a dissertation of not getting/delaying a degree.
"people questioning how you can be so unfamiliar with your students work that you do not catch plagiarism, but I think most people would be pretty understanding about this." its not Master's fault ;)
Well, here is the responsability of two persons: the advisor and the student, but the amount of responsability is somehow lesser for the advisor. I am pretty sure that your past student has signed a non-plagiarism form or put an statement that she was not plagiarizing anything in her thesis work, so she was doing that on purpose. It seems harsh my opinion, but it seems that way.
The only solution is to tell the truth to the Dean and for what I know, the penalty will come sooner or later. According to what you reply, that person plagiarized about 10 pages and also parts of the appendix, so in that case the only way out is to inform about the accident.
I do not think that she will lose her degree, remember the scandal that happened in Germany a few months ago?. The worse thing that could happen is that she get somehow "banned" from the journals that she has been cited, but only for a certain amount of time. About your case, I think that is not so probable that you will get into trouble.
Wish you the best.
So any experience on how such cases are handled in the US vs Germany?
In fact, in the scandal in Germany, several people lost their PhD degrees. It's very well possible in the German system, even decades after the PhD was awarded, such as in the case of the former minister of eduction and research http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annette_Schavan
Um, I'm not sure it is worth bothering about. She gave credit for the results,
it was in the context of describing other people's work, it seems to only involve
the language. This is not a literary topic, so I would tell her to not worry about
it but learn how to write.
An author owns both the written ideas and the language they used to express those ideas. Failure to identify the original author of the ideas and/or the language is plagiarism and should be treated seriously.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.059330 | 2013-06-24T00:44:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10733",
"authors": [
"Annabel Sun",
"Bitwise",
"Bloke Down The Pub",
"DQdlM",
"Frank",
"Greg",
"Indra Lukmana",
"Kaz",
"Keith McClary",
"Marc Claesen",
"Markus Seizinger",
"NPcompleteUser",
"Nethesis",
"Paul G.",
"Phro",
"Piotr Migdal",
"Sai Charan Nivarthi",
"T.J.",
"Vatsal Limbachia",
"envy_intelligence",
"haleonj",
"happymath",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117053",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1201",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14755",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/248",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26624",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26625",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26626",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26634",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26635",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26636",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26638",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26642",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26647",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26649",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3890",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3900",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/532",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64564",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6862",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7055",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7173",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7502",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/86734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/86804",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/86805",
"hunter2",
"jalal245",
"seteropere",
"silvado",
"user541686"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
11809 | How much does TA experience impact acceptance into PhD programs?
Obviously being a teaching assistant as an undergrad or a masters student looks good, but how good does it look? Is it merely a nice little bonus, or does extensive TA experience have a large impact on one's acceptance?
From my perspective admitting students to CS PhD programs:
TAing for CS classes will be a small positive signal that you did well in those classes and were well thought of by the instructor (who presumably asked you to be his TA, or at least accepted your application). It might also let you get to know the professor teaching the class better, which will be helpful for your application if he/she can write you a letter of recommendation. But beyond that, it won't be a huge bonus in and of itself -- its mostly a signal correlated with other good things.
It may depend on:
Where?
For instance, teaching is compulsory in most American universities while in the UK you are only "encouraged" to teach, with some exceptions.
PhD on what?
It may not be that important if you are going to do a PhD in theoretical mathematics or a more "industrial topic", while the opposite may happen if the PhD is in Education.
how good does it look? It looks good, but it doesn't represent a huge advantage. In my opinion, as long as you get all the requirements, the most important part of the application are the reference/recommendation letters.
Updated my tags (computer science, US).
@SteveP. My last comment still applies. Get good reference letters, nothing else matters.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.060543 | 2013-08-11T21:13:35 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11809",
"authors": [
"Exapp",
"Steve P.",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8022",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8132"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
14879 | Employment history and graduate admission
Why do some graduate schools require an employment history for their application forms? Additionally, is it likely that they verify said history via one's social security number?
Is it possible to verify employment history with an SSN?
Thanks for your comment. I know that it is possible. But wonder if it the department or admission office cares to verify it. For example, I might not be interested to share one dramatic employment history..So I wonder what if I don't mention it
@trxw The only way I know would be for someone to have access to the IRS or SS databases. Unless that information is reported to the credit bureaus (as an employer I never reported any of my employees anywhere other than the IRS, state and federal, and SS office). For some reason, you seem to think that with someone's SSN everyone has access to all information about that person's past. If you have evidence of that, please cite it because I do not believe that to be the case.
It is much more likely they will use your SSN to verify your legal status.
They could pull a credit report to get employment history, but that’s illegal (without permission) in the US and the hard way.
Why do some graduate schools want to have employment history on
graduate school application forms?
I can think of a few things:
If you're not coming directly from undergrad, they want to know what work you've been doing. In some cases, it may be entirely irrelevant, but nonetheless, they ask. While references are typically obtained from academic institutions, if you've been in industry for a while, one of your recommendations may come from your employer...
If you are coming directly from undergrad, you may still have been employed during school or have completed some number of internships. Again, while they may not be relevant, there's no reason not to ask, especially if they can positively affect your application.
Either way, employment, depending on what you did, could demonstrate responsibility, leadership, potentially research ability, etc.
Is it likely that they verify it with SSN?
This almost seems like you're trying to determine if they can catch you in a lie--they do not need a SSN to do that. Don't fabricate anything.
Agreed. Also, the people who make decisions on your application probably will not even get your SSN. As an example from a hiring committee I was on, my university wanted SSNs (or equivalent) to verify the applicant could legally work in the United States and to verify that the applicants did not have something nastily criminal in their past. Human Resources did that before we got the applications (and presumably did not forward us the problem applications). We did not receive SSN information.
Thanks for your answer. I am not trying to tell a lie, rather I want to keep some of my work history private. That is a right for privacy, I think.
It is unlikely that something will be verified but still its best for you not to write anything which is not true.
And your employment history tells a lot about you, here is a list of some points apart from those mentioned before:
It shows that you have the capability to handle industry environment
If its a really good company then it shows your excellence because you got through a very difficult interview process
It shows your communication skills and people management skills
It shows your ability in analytic tools also.
So it will be good if you mention all your employment history, be it in a education institute.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.060704 | 2013-12-18T02:39:30 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14879",
"authors": [
"Ali Yeşilkanat",
"Ben Norris",
"Bill Barth",
"ChiPlusPlus",
"JeffE",
"Lookingforbooks",
"Matthew Jackson",
"dor kryzer Stivonim",
"earthling",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38645",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38646",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38647",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38675",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38677",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38687",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8289",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/924",
"student",
"trxw"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
17897 | How to leave a collaborator after being offered to join a new group?
How does one leave one collaborative group for another, prior to the start of the research? This relates to switching project teams for graduate course work, switching research labs, or basically dropping any collaboration. How does one do so politely?
My specific situation:
I have been asked today by one of the best teams to join their group for our major University project. However, I have promised my friend 2 months ago that I will join his team.
How can I join the better team without jeopardizing my relationship with my friend?
Before people vote to close, please consider that this is highly related to graduate school and research collaborations as well.
I don't agree with the reasoning here, but I'd like to see others vote to reopen rather than doing it unilaterally.
First make sure that this is what you want. This is a very important thing to do. Being in a better team is a chance, but also a burden. They will expect you to cooperate at a certain level, which means: stress, lots of work and being on time. If you think that's worth the result and that you are willing to dive into that, then do it.
If your friend is a good friend he/she will understand. I'd suggest to invite your friend for an activity that both of you enjoy a lot, then bring up the topic. Make it clear to your friend that you value the relationship and how difficult it is for you to take that decision, but also can't put down the chance. Ask him/her what he/she would do in your position to get your friend to see it with your eyes.
True friendship will survive that. And if not, then knowing that you took the right decision will help you getting over it.
I will do that. I am not afraid to work hard - i actually want to. The problem is that my friend is lazy
It seems you already make excuses for "dumping" your friend. You seem to think, it is his fault (he is lazy) and not you for breaking your word.
Some people legitimately are lazy. Personally, I would not be willing to risk my success in grad research by collaborating with someone who might hold me back, unless it was in an intentional effort to help them improve.
Make sure that if you are going to do this, it leaves him enough time to find a new group (assuming this is related to a class or an undergraduate/masters project and not a phd collaboration). Going back on your word is one thing (subjectively unethical), but it would be extremely unethical to go back on your word if he does not have the time to adjust to your news accordingly.
If you two have already formed a project idea together, view every idea you have told him as his. Absolutely do not take anything from your current project idea to the new team (especially if he is unable, or too lazy to, find a new team that has their own idea)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.061027 | 2014-03-07T16:58:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17897",
"authors": [
"Alexandros",
"Cuda Shuda",
"Evan",
"LifeSaver",
"Napster",
"Tim",
"WetlabStudent",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10042",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12703",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12807",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48333",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48335",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48370",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48372",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48374",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48450",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"ishmachine",
"madreblu",
"mangrad09",
"user3794498"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
57836 | Should figure captions include the "take home message" that the figure conveys?
Should figure captions only describe all of the necessary components (e.g. the meaning of axes, etc.) or can the figure caption also include a brief sentence about the main conclusion drawn from the figure. For example, say the axes are labelled "speed" and "time". One caption might be "Speed of a giraffe in meters per second as a function of time in seconds from when it first starts moving." It could also have the additional sentence "... Note that Speed is increasing with time." For the previous example, this is probably unnecessary, but for more complicated "take home messages" the point of the figure may not be as obvious. So should comments describing the main result behind the figure be only put in the text body or is it OK to put it in the caption as well? I think this might be field dependent.
The justification for wanting to put the main message of a figure in the caption is that it makes the paper easier to skim, as, anecdotedly, I've heard quite a few people say they skim the paper and focus most of their effort on the figures before ever looking at the results.
You should definitely point out the point of the message if it is not immediately obvious.
@user37208 unless, gods forbid, that your figure is a bitmap figure, thereby denying many the ability of interpreting the figure. The caption is then a textualized summary of what you are missing.
@PålGD: If the figure is a photo, what is wrong about making it a bitmap figure?
@O.R.Mapper I don't know why you would take a photo of a graph lest the deadline's approaching quicker than you'd like it to.
@PålGD: Since when are all figures graphs? What about real-world photographs of test setups or user studies? Screenshots of running software? Photos of prototype devices? Paintings or photographs analyzed or processed by something described in the paper? etc.? As a random example: Count the figures in this paper that are photos and that could just as well be shown as a vector-based graph.
@O.R.Mapper I'm not saying all figures are graphs. I'm just replying to the question. Cute pictures in that article.
There are different schools of thought about this; how much information to include in a figure caption depends largely on personal taste.
Proponents of minimalist figure captions put forth that
It needs less space.
It says in one brief sentence what the figure is about.
Having a long block of text below a figure is ugly.
In contrast, proponents of long figure captions state that
People who (if only at first reading) only skim over the paper and just look at figures do not have to search in the text what each figure is about. The very points found within the figure are explained in depth in the caption.
When looking at a figure in detail, readers do not have to switch forth and back between the descriptive text and the figure, as a concrete description is right below the figure.
Personally, I consider the points in favour of an extensive figure caption more convincing, and I usually go for those as long as space restriction allow so.
An additional benefit is that you can use the paper text for an abstract description of some aspect of your work, and then use the figure caption for an equally detailed, but more concrete description of the example shown in the figure. This way, you improve comprehensibility of your paper without making it seem redundant or repetitive - as a certain degree of overlap (or even exact repetition) between text body and figure captions is acceptable.
+1 for your last paragraph, I had never thought about doing it that way.
A short comment in a caption is ok. But generally captions should stay descriptive of what is drawn in the figure e.g.
Fig. X: estimated airspeed velocity of an unladen European swallow.
They should also ideally not be too redundant with legends although sometimes it helps to say things like "shown at various headwind velocities". The place to draw attention on a specific aspect of the data shown in a figure is the results section.
These are customs and not strictly-enforced rules, nothing bad will happen to you if you take a few liberties. Worst case scenario, you'll have to make a few minor edits during revision.
"The place to draw attention on a specific aspect of the data shown in a figure is the results section." - who says that any part of a figure must be a result?
I strongly advocate for captions that are as self-contained as possible, saying not only what the figure is but also the essence of what the reader should take away from it.
Yes, this introduces some minor degree of redundancy, but I believe this minor inelegance is well worth the benefits that can be obtained. Figures are extremely salient for a reader's attention: there are relatively few of them and they each have a strong visual impact, going through a different set of cognitive pathways than text. Many readers first impression of a paper will thus be formed by its figures, as they flip through a paper deciding whether to read it (and many journals explicitly encourage this with "online previews" that show only the figures of a paper). Even once somebody has decided to read a paper, they may not read all of the sections in depth, but may skim some and read others. Finally, even for a reader going in depth, the cognitive availability of the information associated with a figure is increased when the reader can pull key points right out of the caption rather than needing to go to some more distance part of the text.
As such, I believe that insofar as is possible, figures and their captions should provide a complete sketch of the paper narrative. Doing this will significantly increase the impact of your papers by helping readers at many different levels of commitment to reading.
It's always worth getting someone to proofread your submissions. All co-authors should anyway, and those less involved with that aspect of the work can be best qualified to judge the clarity of your exaplanations (they can also be most liekly to skim over that section). Otherwise, you have peers, help each other. The best style partly depends where your figure is going.
In a journal paper, styles vary between journals, even from the same publisher. Some like dense figures with long captions, or at least, these become the norm when page limits are tight. Other journals prefer more spacious figures, fewer insets, and simpler captions. The correlation between cpation and figure styles is only meant to be indicative; I'm sure you could find examples of simple figures and very full captions. Some journals prefer the legend to be given in the form of text in the caption.
In a thesis you'll normally have a list of figures, with short captions in it. These short captions should give enough information for the reader to find a figure ("There was a figure relating bandgap and lattice spacing, now which figure was it?") while including a subset of the information in a full caption. Thus the full caption will end up reasonably descriptive.
There are a few other, competing, factors:
Help your reader. This is a point I often make, but here could be interpreted as:
Don't waste space and the reader's attention stating the obvious...
... but add clarity.
If a figure really works only in colour (and these should be rare), provide enough information so the reader knows this, and doesn't juyst hink your figure is rubbish.
Consider a reader who may not see too well -- give them the information in text to decide whether to print a large copy. (This is an example, but helping this hypothetical reader may help all your readers).
Help the reviewer. This overalps with helping the reader, but a reviewer will be looking for different things. By all means say "for a full description of the samples, see main text", but rather than just "Sample A (red squares), Sample B (black circles)" give them a gentle reminder of which sample is which (this of course is easy if it's a treated and a control population).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.061338 | 2015-11-09T05:51:18 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/57836",
"authors": [
"1000禽兽大片惺惺相惜_1000 禽兽视频免费看棋逢对手",
"Davidmh",
"John K.",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Spammer",
"WetlabStudent",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158876",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158877",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158878",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158879",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158887",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158890",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158891",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158899",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158903",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158913",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158914",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/158917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6722",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"一木之道小心翼翼_全彩acg漫画被闺蜜3韦编三绝",
"佛本是道爱尚小说网人心不古_道全本小说网兢兢业业",
"全家互爱共欢乐的日子_晓红一家人一起快乐的日子",
"日本摩洛伊兰解放阵线随遇而安_摩洛伊斯兰解放妇女亡羊补牢",
"早乙女由依所有作品大全_早乙女由依图片 gif图解",
"早乙女由衣封面作品合集原来如此_早乙女由依萝莉三部人心不古",
"早乙女由衣萝莉全集_乙都咲乃全作品封面2018",
"炽道小说众志成城_道小说百鸟朝凤"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
88974 | Do reputable journals ever conduct peer review entirely by email?
In the comments to one of the answers to this question, the asker points out that he is asked to submit his review of a manuscript for publication via email and that there is no formal online system with checkboxes or text boxes. This struck me as strange, as having reviewed papers for several biology and math journals I have never been asked to submit my review via email to the editor. Even for very small journals published independently, I have always been asked to use an online system, where all contact is viewable by the editor-in-chief and other parties at the journal.
Do reputable journals ever ask reviewers to submit their reviews via email, or is such a request a red flag that you are being asked to review for a scam journal? Do all reputable journals have online reviewer systems?
Is there any reason why they shouldn't?
You misspelled “obscure” and wrote “secure” by accident. Just in case that wasn’t an accident, let me clarify: these online review systems are of course not secure, they’re, without exception, incredibly shoddy pieces of work that would make real engineers cringe.
@KonradRudolph yes I did not mean secure, I was struggling for a word, perhaps "transparent" is better. Basically I mean anyone who should have access to all contact by authors and reviewers can see all correspondence.
... maybe it's worth mentioning that I've heard of social science journals who couldn't do anything with tex or even pdf files, and everything, from submission of articles to communication must be done with Microsoft Word documents sent via e-mail.
@vsz socail sciences? I've seen reputable engineering/computer science/physics journals not accept tex. I cringe
I have interacted with several reputable math/TCS journals, both as author and as reviewer, entirely via email without the involvement of an online submission. I have even witnessed senior members of the community expressing the sentiment that they never agree to the semi-automated referee requests sent by online submission systems, but only to referee requests sent "by hand".
Summary: Yes, there exist reputable journals conducting peer review entirely by email.
Now whether or not a journal soliciting peer review without an online submission system is more likely to be disreputable than one that does, I do not know. I see no particular reason to assume either way.
No, semi-automated requests are not disreputable. We do not have secretaries anymore which take care of our daily chores, as much of that is expected to be handled automatically. Really, as an editor, having to take care of the lists/logistics of reviewed/nonreviewed/undecided papers is pure waste of time if it can be done automatically. Why should it be disreputable if an editor concentrates on the main duties of their job, namely reading papers/reports and making decisions rather than juggling emails, action items and trigger events?
@CaptainEmacs I don't think anyone is claiming semi-automated requests were disreputable? I am certainly not.
I seem to have misunderstood your response that '[some people] never agree to the semi-automated referee requests sent by online submission systems, but only to referee requests sent "by hand"' as a response to the question about reputable journals. I am, of course, not saying that this is your opinion, but interpreted your response that some people do not respond to these as an indicator for disreputability. If not that, what would be the reason that these people do not respond to semi-automated systems? Lack of personal touch?
@CaptainEmacs The stated reason is, roughly, that they get a lot more requests than they could handle, so they have to reject a lot anyway - and then it boils down to personal touch, and maybe "if it is a lot of work for me, I want the editor to suffer a bit, too". I had mentioned this as it indicates that the semi-automated messages should not be read as a sign of more reputation at all.
@CaptainEmacs See this: I will not log in to your website
@ShreevatsaR Ok, there is a mixture of points here. The problem of greedy publishers (which I can sympathise with - but it's not the issue here) and badly written software which forces me to log in and remember stupid passwords that I will only use once, but, when I have to review again, I have to have the login credentials sent again (what a nuisance). Ok, I got your point, I think these websites are evil ;-) On the other hand, there are automated systems which do not require all that effort.
@CaptainEmacs It's not up to you whether these are disreputable or not. If people consider them to be, then they are, however much justification you might have for using them.
@jwg I am not aware to have claimed anywhere that I would decide whether they are disreputable or no (and never would). All I am saying that in answering the question one has to distinguish refusal to respond to semi-automated review requests due to "disreputability" or simply other reasons why people do not like using these systems.
Not long ago all reviews were handled not by email, but by paper mail. I submitted my first paper in 2003 and at that time submission was still by paper. However, I got an acknowledgement that the paper has been received via email, but the response of acceptance from the editor was in paper again. An online system was not in sight at that point.
I would say that there is nothing inherently bad about email communication with the editor. It may just be that he or she is just old fashioned. These days I still get asked by some editors from reputed journals for reviews in personal emails and send my response via email, too. Nothing bad about this.
"I submitted my first paper in 2003 and at that time submission was still by paper." For that particular journal. I also submitted my first paper in 2003 and I've only ever submitted by email or through web interfaces.
Oh, true - other journals had been "ahead" in technology…
I was also surprised about this. I haven't submitted by snail mail since the 90s.
My experience (in pure maths) is that this is normal for journals that are run out of a university - which includes some very good ones - and only the for-profit publishers have polished online interfaces.
A bit of a plug for the group of open-access journals I'm working for (as a layout/copy editor): although most of them are still using only e-mails and secretaries, we're currently transiting to a customized OJS (Open Journal Systems), while still being free and getting money only from subsides of our universities and the CNRS.
Supplementing the other answers: I myself tend to be suspicious of the legitimacy of automated requests to referee, with someone I know listed as editor... since there are many bogus journals that claim several genuine scholars (for me, mathematicians) as "editors". Some of these requests are indeed bogus. A few are not. When I receive an automated request, I email the purported editor to ask whether everything is kosher. If they say it is, then I do the refereeing.
I think it is not a good thing that refereeing gets automated, and all still without pay, of course. So that traditional publishers need fewer employees, while yet profiting from the good-will volunteerism of academics.
That is, I don't think the issue is "transparency", but, rather, whether or not we (collectively) willingly become cogs in an automated machine that doesn't pay us anything, but charges us (or our libraries) to see the outcomes of our work.
This is another matter. I've seen a tendency toward rejecting reviews from for-profit journals. If academia were to embrace that, the for-profit journals would be done for. Given the tendency toward open access journals, this makes the dichotomy even stronger. I used to be on the editorial board of a journal run by a for-profit publisher. At this point I don't think I would even review for one.
I should add, Paul's comment about charging libraries (or us) applies not just for the for-profit publications but for those run by nonprofit associations. They need to recoup expenses because the publications do provide a service. But I think there is a big difference in what they charge, and what they provide.
Refereeing doesn't get automated. The editor still has to use their own intellect and experience to choose suitable referees. Honestly, I don't see what difference it makes whether the editor types your email address into the mail client and writes your email (which may well be copy-pasted anyway) or types your email into a different piece of software which sends you a pre-composed email. And the whole "are for-profit journals" a good thing debate is contentious and completely tangential to the question.
@DavidRicherby, to my perception, it is not at all the same to receive an email from software (whom I've not met?), than from a person, especially if the person is known to me. In particular, I am far more willing to do a personal favor for a colleague, than for software serving a corporation. All the more so if I can't just email a report, but have to have an account, a password, and do whatever point-and-click the software demands.
I still don't see the difference. Your colleague either told one piece of software to ask you to review a paper, or told a different piece of software. Your point about needing accounts and passwords and things to use the web interfaces is a much stronger one. (Though, still, compared to the effort of reading the paper and writing a report, the effort of creating an account is pretty negligible, even when you include the effort of retrieving your forgotten password the next time you review for that publisher.)
@DavidRicherby, when I get an email from a friend, asking me a favor, it usually sounds just like that. The software does not attempt to be "personal"...
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.062034 | 2017-05-04T07:43:40 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/88974",
"authors": [
"Ander Biguri",
"Arno",
"Captain Emacs",
"David Richerby",
"Dirk",
"Fred Douglis",
"Konrad Rudolph",
"Luris",
"Martin Argerami",
"ShreevatsaR",
"WetlabStudent",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10065",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12047",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16023",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4246",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46966",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/529",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/542",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5824",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6580",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"jwg",
"paul garrett",
"vsz"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
120453 | How to handle unprofessional negative reviews from a journal?
My problem is similar to this this and this question, but still slightly different.
I am facing the problem that my paper was rejected form a journal (with the option to resubmit to the same journal again), where two reviews were provided.
The first review was well written, constructive and shows that the main parts of the paper were read and understood. Nevertheless, the first reviewer suggests to "Review Again After Major Changes".
The second review (who rejected the paper) on the other hand shows clearly that he neither read the paper nor the references listed in the related works section or any background material on that subject (as referenced in the paper or readily available online). Moreover, the review is filled with spelling mistakes, wrong references/citations and wrong claims. In essence, it gives the impression that it was written in a hurry without proper review of paper. But most importantly, the reviewer expects comparisons to concepts with are completely out of date and partly do not fit the discussed scenario.
I am currently preparing a resubmission to the same journal, which will most probably be handled by the same editor and reviewers. My questions is concerning the handling of the second review in the response letter in general and whether it is appropriate to contact the editor right now (few days after the receiving the rejection), shortly before or after the resubmission or not all regarding the review provided by the second reviewer.
@GEdgar That's an answer, and as it says when trying to add a comment: Avoid answering questions in comments. At the moment it can not be discussed properly, edited, voted on, or accepted.
It appears that the editor gave more weight to the first review, or at least gave you the "benefit of the doubt". Since you have the chance to re-submit, and you decided to do so, you should have to respond point-by-point to every comment that both reviewers made. Now "respond" is a deliciously diplomatic word that includes all the spectrum of reactions: from, say, "I did exactly what you asked" to, say, "go find a hole to hide and die, you stupid ignorant".
The main advise I have to give is : keep your judgements to yourself (about which review was helpful to you, whether the one appears sloppy etc), don't differentiate between the two reviews in your response, and don't be more aggressive in your writing style when you respond to the points made by the second.
For example, Don't defend not comparing your work to concept X because "it is completely out of date". Defend your choice because, say, "concept X, valuable indeed when it first appeared in the literature, has been succeeded by etc see reference 1, reference 2, reference 3". You get the spirit. If the "outofdateness" is your opinion and the field does not agree with you,then, you have another paper in the making, one where you will try to convince the other scholars of your field that concept X is indeed outdated.
If you do that correctly, the editor will certainly get the message (and well corroborated) about what you think of the quality of the two reviews, and why, even though nowhere in your response such an evaluation will explicitly appear.
Thank you for your answer. Is my understanding correct that you do not recommend to contact the editor separately regarding our opinion on the second reviewer?
@bonanza Indeed I don't. Let your response to the reviews do all the talking.
+1. Let me just supplement to emphasize that your new version should show no evidence of responding directly to the reviews. Just write a new version using whatever is helpful from the reviewers. Don't mention the reviewer comments in the new version in any way, just change what you believe would be proper to change based on that feedback. Let the new version speak entirely for itself. I don't think you need to complain to the editor about the "bad" review. He/she likely knows already of the problem or wouldn't have invited a new version. You could respond, but not needed, likely.
@Buffy, are you recommending not to mention the reviews at all even in the response letter? That seems to be taking it too far.
@Buffy I'm confused. Who mentions reviewer comments in the paper? That goes in the response letter. And, as a reviewer, I expect a response to each of the points I made in my review. Perhaps it's because papers are quite long in my field (25-35 pages is normal; 50+ is still quite common), but it woudln't be considered reasonable in my field to just leave the reviewers to figure out what's been changed between the two versions.
@DavidRicherby, no one does this I hope. But in case the OP is inexperienced here, I wanted to make it as clear as possible.
@Buffy OK, I see your point.
@Wildcard, no, not that, responding in the letter (not the article) is fine, but I doubt that it is needed here. It isn't required to justify your decisions, just to write a great paper.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.062869 | 2018-11-21T18:24:54 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/120453",
"authors": [
"Alecos Papadopoulos",
"Buffy",
"David Richerby",
"Wildcard",
"bonanza",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23597",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46356",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53536",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8575",
"pipe"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
45584 | Are Indian assistant professors eligible for tenure-track positions in the US?
Suppose an assistant professor from a reputable Indian university wants to apply for tenure-track positions in the United States. Would he or she have any chance? Assume that his or her publication record is on par with faculty members at top-level US universities.
I imagine the answer here may be highly field-dependent. For instance, I doubt that a nuclear physicist would have much success looking for positions in the US.
aeismail - is this because the field is very narrow or because of national security concerns?
I don't know if other fields are similar, but in mathematics, there are semester-long or year-long focused research programs at places like IAS, ICERM, MSRI etc, for which you can apply to participate. That is a good way to spend some time in the US, get your work known in the US, ask advice from people who will understand your specific situation, and (if you're lucky) perhaps impress people who might recommend to their departments that they should try to hire you.
Is this professor has experience writing US grants, familial with the differences in education, has maybe experience working with grad students?
Yes with caveats -- and the caveats have nothing to do with being Indian and everything to do with being outside of the American educational system:
There are particularities of the application process that are culturally bound and that you may not be familiar with (the style of the cover letter, its importance [or not], the style of your research and teaching statements, the format of your CV, who you ask to serve as a reference).
Your references may also be unfamiliar with American letters of reference styles. I find that foreign letters tend to be much shorter and much less enthusiastic.
Search committee members may not be familiar with your universities and its rank, with the ranking of the journals you've published in, and the significance of your teaching and service. They may be concerned that you do not know how to teach to American student audiences or that you may not be able to successfully apply for grants from American grant agencies.
The provost (who oversees searches) may be unwilling to authorize the search committee to bring in an international candidate due to the cost of airfare.
The university may be concerned about whether or not you will be able to obtain a visa to work. Even if you are able to get a visa, even under the best of cases, an international candidate who accepts a job offer in March may not be able to start by August of the same year because of visa delays. This may have programmatic repercussions (i.e., they need someone to teach CS101 in the Fall).
Rarely, some jobs are closed to non-Americans because the government grants or cooperating agencies require security clearances or have other restrictions. This is more common in the engineering and physical sciences.
In Canada, some positions are required to be offered to Canadian citizens before they are permitted to open to non-Canadians. The same rule technically applies in the USA for immigrant visas, but is not scrutinized as much.
etc.
As you can see, none of these have anything to do with you coming from India, and everything to do with being an international candidate. You'd have much more luck if you were applying from inside the USA (e.g., take a post-doc in the USA for a year or two and apply while on that).
#2 sometimes tends to be a result of letters being visible to the candidate.
#4 sounds rather dumb. The university may be saving a few thousands dollars, but also they are going to spend ~90k$/year for many years just in salary. From any economical balance, it is worth the risk if the applicant may be better.
@Davidmh you haven't dealt with many provosts, have you? Logic is futile. From the provost's perspective, foreign faculty are a source of ongoing cost from the interview to the paperwork for visas to family issues.
@RoboKaren I have had my share of bureaucracy, so I am not doubting it is true. It is just that one wishes they were able to reason in long term economy terms too.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.063281 | 2015-05-17T19:26:49 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/45584",
"authors": [
"Anonymous",
"Davidmh",
"Delayed signal",
"Greg",
"Rahul Kumar pandit",
"Raymond",
"RoboKaren",
"aeismail",
"dtc",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11565",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125276",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125278",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125288",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125289",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125291",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125294",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125295",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126456",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14755",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"sailestim",
"selbie",
"user125289",
"zoltanHOD"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
43189 | What's the point of a MSc if I can just enroll in a PhD program?
I am thinking about doing a PhD as I am quite interested in research, I really enjoy trying to figure problems out myself and having to find and understand the necessary information I need for my next report or project myself. This is great.
I am currently enrolled on BSc Computer Science and I am in my last year. Its going nicely so far. So long as I do well (at least a 2.1) then I will consider perusing a PhD.
The problem I have is that I don't know whether or not I should go for a MSc first before getting a PhD. I mean whats the point if I can just enroll on a PhD immediately?
I have talked to some other students who have done MSc/PhDs in their respective degrees and a lot of them tell me that I shouldn't waste a year of my life on an MSc, they say if your going to do a PhD, then an MSc is pretty pointless.
Is there truth to this?
This depends on your locale. It sounds like you are in the US. In Germany, you will usually need to have a M.Sc. to be eligible for entering a Ph.D. program. (Which will then not take as long as a US Ph.D. program.)
Dan is obviously in the UK - I don't think American unis give 2.1 degrees.
If you know you're going to continue on to a PhD, then there is no need to pick up a MSc, unless a specific program you're interested in requires you to acquire the MSc before continuing on to a PhD.
Some people want to have the flexibility that comes with acquiring a MSc, but this is a matter of personal interest, rather than a requirement. The danger is, of course, that if you decide to stop your PhD studies, then you run the risk of having worked for several years without any degree at all.
The "danger" you mention may not exist in all programs. In many PhD programs, you can be awarded a masters degree after completing the first couple years of the program (which involves work similar to a masters).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.063883 | 2015-04-08T11:17:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43189",
"authors": [
"Alexey Romanov",
"BlairCheer",
"GeorgeDK",
"J. LS",
"Nate Eldredge",
"ResearchRn",
"Rocky Pal",
"Spammer McSpamface",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117069",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117070",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117071",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117072",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117073",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117074",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32203",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
26256 | Writing CV's for a "summer school" course
I would like to apply to a week-long master's course offered by a university in another country. The only thing they require for the application is a CV.
Since I have no significant experience in the field of the course or any publications, I have no idea what to include in my CV.
I thought about including (outside basic details) the title of my diploma work, the name of my supervisor and the main subjects (relevant to the course) I've learnt as an undergraduate. But I am wondering if it is too detailed.
I've also taken some MOOCs, but they are not strongly related either. I could include the titles of the conference presentation I've held and my language and computer skills and scholarships I've got.
Which of these would be appropriate to include?
Thanks for the help!
Of course I don't know anything about this particular course, but often, admission to summer school courses is not at all competitive, and there are seats (and sometimes funding) for more or less every serious student who shows interest. (If it were competitive, I'd expect them to at least want a letter of recommendation.)
So basically your CV has to convince them of the following:
You are an actual grad student, and not some goofball trying to use them to get a visa. So be sure to include your academic history (degrees and dates, honors if any) and the details of the program in which you are currently enrolled. Definitely give your supervisor's name.
The course will be interesting and relevant to you. Mention your areas of scientific interest (they should be at least tangentially related to the topic of the course). List any relevant research projects, past or present, even if they are fairly minor. Definitely include any published papers or conference presentations.
You have sufficient background to learn something from the course, and not get completely lost (getting a little bit lost is normal). Briefly mention your GPAs and scholarships. If it seems appropriate, list classes you have taken or books you have read that would prepare you for this course.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.064093 | 2014-07-22T20:09:25 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26256",
"authors": [
"NR Wilson",
"RoG",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70191",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70193",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70208",
"kenny marsh",
"rdeljon"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
98813 | My adviser keeps changing his mind about my papers. What should I do?
How do you overcome advisers constantly moving the football / changing their minds?
I write papers after recommendations from my advisers and every time I end up redoing the entire analysis or asking an entirely different question. I feel like Charlie Brown and Lucy keeps moving the football. Here are three examples:
I spent the entire third year of my PhD working on a paper with my committee chair using a specific type of model he specializes in to answer my research question. After completing the paper and submitting it to my department for review, my adviser comes back and says to scrap it. I pushed back a bit and asked what should be changed, but nothing could change his mind. He wanted a two-page outlining the new research question and modeling strategy. So I scrapped it and now the paper sits in a folder in my Dropbox.
I spent my summer working on another paper with my committee chair as part of my dissertation. I finalize my results and draft a paper for my proposal defense. My committee approves my proposal, but in a meeting afterwards my chair suggests I redo the research question and thus incorporate a new modeling strategy. The paper has gone through several revisions, is complete, and ready to be sent out for peer review. However, here I am again reworking the analysis with a completely different modeling strategy and question.
And finally, another paper I have been working on has had results for over a year, but is now undergoing a major revision to rework the modeling strategy, again. I am now on the 4th major revision of this paper having redone the entire analysis each time. I was literally writing up the results/discussion section of the paper when I received an email suggesting we rework the model.
On top of these three examples, I have two working papers that need minor revisions and are at a point where they could be sent out for peer review. I have published several papers as lead author and constantly review papers for other academic journals in my field, so while my experience is limited I know my research can be published.
I feel like my advisers keep moving the football and I can't get my dissertation completed. I was on track to graduate in the spring, but none of the papers for my dissertation are complete and it appears I will need another year. But my experience thus far has lead me to believe Lucy will continue to move the football, so I'm considering dropping out and finishing ABD.
How can I deal with this constant momentum shift of my papers with advisers?
This isn't directly relevant, but I'm wondering if your adviser gave you any reasons for all these constant do-overs. You haven't said so explicitly one way of the other. Is he dissatisfied with the existing work and thinks it can be done better? Or something else?
submitting it to my department for review — What?? Why does the department (or your advisor) need to review your research before you submit it for publication?
@JeffE Third year paper is submitted to the department for review. It is not necessary for publication, but necessary for pass/fail during third year.
I experienced a bit of what you're describing near the end of my PhD. I got a lot of good advice from colleagues that had completed their doctorates. Here's how I dealt with it.
Remember that it's your PhD, and you are (mostly) in charge. At this point, you should have a pretty good idea of what's really required for a PhD. (If not, skim more dissertations from similar research projects.)
There will always be more that could be done to further the research. There's always another technique you could try, another analysis to do. Your goal should be to do what's required to finish the PhD, no more. (Of course, you want to do quality work, but if you've made it this far, I doubt you'd settle for less.) You can always continue the research as a postdoc, or let someone else continue it. That's what the "future directions" section is for in your thesis.
Your advisors are focussed on the research itself, and the logical next steps, rather than on wrapping up your PhD. That doesn't mean they're bad people, or deliberately trying to frustrate you. They're just human.
Sit down and figure out what you think needs to be done before you are ready to finish the experiments, finalise your thesis, and defend it. Then meet with your advisors and get their feedback. If they suggest doing more experiments or analysis, beyond what you think is necessary, you might say something like "I agree that's a good future direction, but I think that could be done post-PhD." Your goal is not to convince them that X doesn't need to be done, it's to discuss whether X needs to be done before the PhD can be awarded. Negotiate things from that point-of-view, and I think you'll find it easier to reach agreement.
One of my colleagues went through a similar problem when he was in graduate school: his primary advisor kept moving the goalposts on him as he was trying to finish all his papers and graduate.
There are no easy solutions here. The best thing I would do is use the fact that you have all of this work done waiting and ready to go out. It sounds like you already have enough material for a dissertation. Therefore, I would suggest that you compile everything you have done so far, and present it to your committee. Let them know that "this is what I have done that's waiting for peer review," and ask if everyone can come to the agreement that it's ready to go out. If not, then ask, as mhwombat suggests, exactly what needs to be done. Then stick to it. (It seems your advisor has a severe case of "perfectionitis"—good for him in the long term, bad for you in the here and now.)
good for him in the long term — [citation needed]
I’m finding that many PhD advisors make better critics, perfectionists, and game players than mentors. Mentoring requires a certain high level of character and humility. Some mentors make it all about themselves and less about the person they’re guiding and the research. Moving the goalposts is not acceptable of an advisor. Yet,I’ve heard many of my peers who’ve completed their PhD say it’s a game. Also, some advisors act as gatekeepers and will not the people they’re guiding move forward without making the goal through the moving goalposts. That’s frightening! It shouldn’t feel like being hazed. It’s your PhD, your research, not the advisor’s. Decide what you want and negotiate from your perspective. The project will always have the possibility of being better. Know when and where to finish. You can always improve the project postdoc. Tomorrow is another day.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.064300 | 2017-11-11T20:02:58 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98813",
"authors": [
"Amstell",
"Faheem Mitha",
"JeffE",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24782",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/285",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
47141 | Can I publish a report from a personal project?
During the course of my post-graduation, a friend and I worked on a personal project in pattern recognition. I honestly am not hesitant to admit that although the technique has a decent result on a publicly available dataset, it is not publication worthy in any journal or conference of note (or so I feel), nor do I (my friend is unavailable now) have enough time or background knowledge in the field to keep working on it till it is.
Can it be published as some kind of academic report or something on a site like arxiv or academia.edu or something? I'm interested predominantly because I'm wondering if this online availability would lend more credence to it being mentioned in my cv - as opposed to merely mentioning it and not having any transcript available.
PS: The method was something we came up with. It was not implemented from somewhere else.
please clarify what you mean by "publish" in your second paragraph. I can't answer for arxiv, but putting it in your academia.edu page will mean it is accessible to the world -- but it won't count as a peer-reviewed publication and may not count for much in other senses of the world "published"
@virmaior Well in the context of the line in question, I use "published" to mean simply putting it up for access on a site like arxiv or academia (with a tag perhaps saying academic report). Yes I realize it won't be peer reviewed and I should state that I'm not expecting it to mean much more than a clearly written account of my experiments and results.
If you want it to be worth something on your CV, you should invest the time to make it publication-worthy and publish it
I understand your point. I know that myself to be honest but nonetheless I will keep your suggestion in mind in case I find time to work on it though I admit it's unlikely. Thanks.
I don't think you can publish it in a way that you can derive credit from. But if you want it to be public so someone else can take the ball and run with it, then publish it on the web (with your collaborator's permission).
@aparente001 I understand. Thanks.
PS: If you put that in an answer I'll accept it.
There are two different questions in here, one about personal projects and another about whether it's worth publishing a non-peer-review tech report.
For the first: there is no need for "official" blessing on any scientific work; I've published personal side projects just as happily as projects in my "proper" line of work. These can end up being quite significant: one of my bits of side-dabbling, published in a minor workshop, kicked off my entire current line of synthetic biology research.
That surprising consequence also leads us toward the answer to the second: significance is where people find it. If you've put work into something, and written it up in a non-embarrassing way, there's no reason not to put it up online in an archival format, whether arXiv, tech report, or some other low-impact format. Symposia and workshops can be a lot of fun too, since they often accept things that are interesting but not expected to necessarily be high impact.
If a piece of work is non-embarrassing, what's the worst that can happen if you put it online? Nobody cites it. But you never know... your coauthor might end up building something more significant out of it later (happened to one of my side-publications), or it might get noticed by people who happen to be dealing with a similar problem (happened to another of mine), and collect a few citations or even unexpectedly many.
In short: there is never a reason to throw good work in the trash. Put it online, and let the universe decide whether it's neutral or positive.
Non-embarrassing is the thought that has floated in my mind many times I guess. Thanks - I'll see what I can do.
Are you affiliated academically or with some research organization? If so, one possible option is to investigate whether you would like to issue your results as a technical report. (See also this discussion on this very site on why technical reports exist.)
Some examples:
The US government issues regularly scientific and technical reports
Universities/departments frequently do too: ETHZ, Cambridge, MIT.
So do private companies with R&D budgets: HP, Google.
If permitted by your sponsors, such reports can also be posted to arXiv together with the internal technical report number.
Though to be honest, with online publication as easy as it is, there is no real need to go through the above except if you want it to "look more official" somehow.
If it involves a lot of code, you can put it as a repository in GitHub or Bitbucket. It won't count as a publication, but it will be available for others to see and possibly re-use or work upon. In some fields, bioinformatics for example, it is perfectly ok to list one's github repositories in the CV, serving to showcase your skills to future employers.
I don't think you can publish it in a way that you can derive credit from. But if you want it to be public so someone else can take the ball and run with it, then publish it on the web (with your collaborator's permission).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.064921 | 2015-06-13T13:20:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47141",
"authors": [
"Alwin",
"Ankita Ray",
"Arpit Chugh",
"Display name",
"Luigi",
"Roy",
"Sunanda",
"Thushari",
"aparente001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129944",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129945",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129946",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130588",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130708",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130709",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130714",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130741",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17331",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19769",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/29457",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"ravimehta",
"th1rdey3",
"virmaior",
"yoshi"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
108790 | Is it possible to switch between Ph.D. departments at the same university?
I recently asked about the ethicality of staying in a Ph.D. program (first-year) while attempting to transfer to a different university that I had declined previously. Unfortunately, the funding was cut short for said program and I did not get off the wait list for funding.
The main reason I wanted to transfer was due to the fact that I wanted to focus on a more applied math program as opposed to the current program I am in that focuses on bioinformatics/biology. Since the transfer/funding did not work out, I was curious if I could possibly transfer from the Ph.D. I am currently in to the math Ph.D. program. They are both under the same college of sciences. I did my undergrad in both math and cell/molecular biology and I believed I could incorporate enough math but if possible I’d like to just get the applied math Ph.D. and apply it to biology instead of the other way around.
My two options are either to stay in my program and recruit many math committee members or to outright move to the math department. I don’t particularly want to ask my own department yet because I don’t want to be looked down upon or lose any funding because I do want to stay here and will happily finish (eventually) by incorporating more math based individuals.
I was wondering if this has been done before or if anyone has any advice on how to go about this? Obviously I’d like my funding to carry over and I believe since they’re in the same college of sciences it may be doable. I’m worried that I’ll be criticized or judged for wanting to do this or lose my funding. Since my first option of going to the other program at a different university didn’t workout and I didn’t hear about it till a week ago, I was unable to really follow this second option.
Whether it can be done or not depends entirely on the regulations of your particular institution. What is much more likely to say is that you will probably not be able to carry your funding over from your old department to your new one. Funding very rarely can be transferred, since it is usually attached to some project or department, rather than any individual.
The only time I have seen funding carry is when it was attached to a project and the PI was jointly appointed by the two departments.
The funding I’m offered is in the form of a GTA teaching labs. Most of my funding actually comes from the biology department and a minority of it comes from my actual department. I’m not sure how they manage that but I assume it has to do with my department being much smaller.
Realistically, in the cases I have seen, the student had a champion in the new department who was able to push the change through. It will also help if your current advisor is supportive.
@Dawn Since I’m just now finishing up my first year I haven’t really decided on who my advisor will be for the rest of my stay here. I have one that is technically my advisor but he’s the individual I chose when applying to do my first lab rotation (I must do 3 before deciding exactly who I want )
First thing, unless you got a funding from an outside source to the university, it is VERY UNLIKELY your funding will be carried over (for example, math funding is usually by TAing/teaching as everyone takes math classes, I guess biology funding comes in the form of lab work).
Second, it is very likely that this late in the year, admissions in math are already done deal (and they tend to have limited spots as usually math admissions are fully funded with TAships). I would suggest looking into adjacent fields which are more bio-friendly and less competitive than math, say statistics (bio-stats? experiment design?) or CS (systems biology?).
Now it is evident from your post and the previous one that you are unhappy with your field of study and position, and it effects you and your work.
Instead of complementing too much, the only honorable/reasonable way to solve that (and maybe move to other program in math, in this university or another), is to terminate the bio program, on good terms (schedule a meeting with director of graduate studies, shake his hand, thank him for the opportunity, say this program is not a good fit for you and ask him if he can assist moving to math, maybe he's BFF with someone from the math admissions committee, it is clear this step is terminal from the biology perspective, but at least you keep your credibility and won't get bad recommendations from the bio staff), right now, you're wasting time (yours and the bio staff) and money.
Your first option is not very viable one. Most math professors (even the applied one) are not usually drawn to bio (rather than CS/Physics), and they are busy people, I highly doubt that you would be able to convince them to participate in a bureaucratic thing (committee) for a student not from their department. Moreover, as in biology you're tied to a lab, rather than being a more-or-less independent researcher as in math, eventually your research would need to align with the intentions of your advisor, namely a bio guy, and this would give even less of an incentive to the math people to support you.
Good luck whatever you do.
Since the time that has passed from that linked post to now, I’ve been able to actually enjoy the field I am in. I believe most of my unhappiness came from the classes I was taking and or the instructors. I’ve been able to take some courses this semester that have re-sparked my interest in the field I am currently in. I am after all in a computational biology program in which many of the faculty do incorporate mathematics (mainly biophysics, which happens to be one of the courses I just mentioned). I don’t think I am wasting their time nor mine. I’m not in a purely bio program.
However I do agree with most of what you said. I think my best bet is to continue the program and pursue what interests me thus far (biophysics etc) and see if I’m able to integrate some more math based individuals into my research/committee. I was assured by the head that he can get me in touch with individuals they have done work with from the math department.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.065338 | 2018-04-27T15:42:51 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108790",
"authors": [
"Dawn",
"H5159",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31311",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56938"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
47226 | In APA style, How should rough financial numbers be written?
If I have approximately five million dollars, should it be written as such? Or is one of the following more appropriate?
5 million dollars
$5 million
$5,000,000
4.31e stipulates:
Use numerals to express numbers that represent time, dates, ages, scores and points on a scale, exact sums
of money, and numerals as numerals.
(emphasis mine)
As this isn't an exact sum, I might be more inclined to spell it out. This would also play along with the exception listed right below 4.31e:
Exception: Use words for approximations of numbers of days, months, and years
(e.g., about three months ago).
Is there another option I'm not considering? Is this addressed somewhere else in the guide?
Your question has two components: 1) Whether to write out the number as a numeral or in words, and 2) whether to indicate "dollars" in words or with a symbol.
I did not find a direct answer or example in the manual, but a discussion on the APA style blog may provide some guidance:
http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2010/04/feel-like-a-number-part-3-the-earth-day-edition.html
To address issue one, look at the question in the comments sectiom (comment #7 from the top) where a student asks about the proper way to write about an approximate number of people. The author of the style post states that the correct answer is "Almost 3,000,000 people." She provides the explanation that because 3,000,000 is larger than 10, is should be written as a numeral. She does not comment on the issue of this being an approximate amount, but because the question is about an approximate number of people, it seems she interprets the exception to rule 4.31e as only pertaining to the units of time listed in the exception. Also, note that in the body of the blog post, the author refers to approximate units of time rather than approximate numbers in general.
To address issue two, look further in the comments section, at the bottom two comments on the page. Here, someone asks how to write about an amount of money that is less than $10. The author notes that in prose, she would recommend writing out the word "dollars," while in tables or with mathematical operators, it might be more appropriate to use the symbol (referring to rule 4.45 about describing statistics in text).
In sum, this discussion seems to indicate that "I have about 5,000,000 dollars" would be the correct form. The number would be written in numerical form because a) it is over 10 and b) it is not an approximate amount of time. The unit of money ("dollars") would be written in prose text and appear as a symbol on tables or when discussing mathematical operations.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.065784 | 2015-06-15T04:57:41 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47226",
"authors": [
"Galactic",
"Salim B",
"Shell17",
"Thomas Brown",
"cam",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130218",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130219",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130220",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130231",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/133539",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/133542",
"sari abade"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
47222 | In APA style, what is the appropriate way to differentiate between two organization divisions that both have the word "and" in their names?
I am writing a paper in APA style. I am attempting to list two organization divisions of a library:
Information Technology and Technical Services
Academic Outreach and Services
How do I write and/or style these in a sentence to clearly define the separation of terms without looking like a poorly written sentence? I'm not entirely convinced using quotes or italics is correct, but I'm leaning towards italics vs. anything else.
The two major divisions, “Information Technology and Technical Services” and “Academic Outreach and Services,” ...
vs
The two major divisions, Information Technology and Technical Services and Academic Outreach and Services, ...
Normally I wouldn't quote the two, but I'm not sure how else to write it. Italics would work as well, but I don't know if that's appropriate or not, as the APA style guide doesn't appear to have suggestions for anything corporate/organization-related (4.08, 4.21). 4.21 suggests using italics for clarifying words, so that seems somewhat more appropriate than quotes, but the given example doesn't give me much confidence (the example given is "the small group [meaning a designation, not group size]").
Since this is about style for the article text, not the citations, I removed the [tag:citation-style] tag and replaced it with [tag:writing] and [tag:writing-style].
@NateEldredge As an aside, it seems that the application of style manuals (e.g., APA, MLA) to non-citation related issues is not readily classified by the existing tagging system. Perhaps there is a need for a new tag.
I had initially tagged it as writing-style, but someone else changed that. I agree with @JeromyAnglim that a new tag would be useful, as I was a little confused which tag(s) would be appropriate given the topic.
If following APA style you should not use quotation marks or italics for names of organisations.
You could use an in-line list to make it clear.
To apply this to your example:
There are two major divisions: (a) Information Technology and Technical Services and (b) Academic Outreach and Services.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.066019 | 2015-06-15T02:32:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47222",
"authors": [
"A Paul",
"Jeromy Anglim",
"Kaiya Xiong",
"Manale Boussahor",
"ND Geek",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Noah",
"eman ali",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1086",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130199",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130200",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130208",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130216",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130217",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"user130216"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
106754 | How to know a community of researchers in order to be more successful in research and getting papers accepted?
Knowledge is what lies between heads of people in a community; This is an idea, I recently learned from a video tutorial on writing research papers in a youtube video. In this video, a professor presents such a model of knowledge which is different from what I already thought.
This suggests a measure of success in research is the amount of change she's able to effect in the space between heads. This video talks about community and people in power in that community. So we must know the community, its structure, who the people in power in the community are, and what knowledge is already in the space between heads.
The ideas proposed in this video seem tantalizing but I feel I haven't completely understood his thesis. I will try to lay out what's hanging me up about this:
I want to understand what a "journal's community" is? since this professor says that will affect the acceptance of a submission.
In short, please help me understand the outlined aspects of this model of knowledge?
Note from question editor: if you have some ideas about how to improve this post further, with the goal of getting it reopened, please grab your red pen and help out. Thanks.
We usually want to know something from a perspective. Here we want to know a community such that we as researchers can better understand how to communicate with the community through Papers. All of the aforementioned sub-questions are around this single thread.
Attend conferences in your area.
This question may be borderline on-topic. It is possible many people voted for off-topic instead of unclear. The SE system cannot show multiple close reasons, when there are 5 close votes, the system can display only one reason. That said, I don't exactly see what is unclear. Your suggestions on what to divulge at the bottom are indeed irrelevant, as you think. Please don't feel pressured to reveal your 'real name', pseudonyms are ok.
Meta discussion about this question
What is unclear in this question? Every question should be self-contained. Unless we watch the video, how could we know what he meant by "community"?
Voting to reopen. Please see https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4095/32436
@user85361 - See what you think about my edits. Thank you.
I interpreted Prof. McEnerney's comments as 'birds of feather flock together'. Basically, if you don't behave like you belong, then you are considered an outsider and hence doesn't know the area. Tell-tale signs include using the wrong technical terms or jargon, using non-standard methodologies, etc. One rule of thumb is simply to look at articles in journals you want to target and compare your article with published articles. For example, if the community expects mathematical proofs or theoretical work, does your article contain such proofs or theories?
@Prof.SantaClaus, Thank you for your comment. Would you please explain it a little more
I have deleted the question which was the reason for some people thought the question is unclear. Please verify and vote to reopen. Thank you all. I just want a better understanding of a subject through discussions with members of this excellent Network of people. Thank you.
@TheGuy, Thank you, What if I can't?.
@user85361, Thank you for your edits. Check it now.
@Code, I have edited the question. Please check it now.
through discussions Please note that we are a Q&A site. We don't do discussions.
1) Communities usually revolve around research topics, rather than journals. There are smaller and broader communities. The smallest ones are about a very specialized topic that only three research groups in the world are knowledgable about. The broadest ones are about an entire overarching research field. Of course, there also are overlaps between communities.
2+3) In my field, the only correct answer would be: Go to meetings and conferences. This is the place where people go to exchange ideas, in talks and informal conversations.
4) This is a very broad question. There can be all kinds of relations between communities, personal ones (overlaps) and emotional ones (respect, envy, disregard).
I feel it is not a research topic that defines communities except the largest ones. Often I see journal and editorials of them which although they work on the same topic, I didn't even know them.
Of course we can use term community in a very broad sense such as research community. But this way we miss the point that what is our aim, in talking about community: Getting our papers accepted and change the mind of people in the community.
@user85361 You might have a wrong impression of the way that the term "community" is used in academia.
Often I see journal and editorials of them which although they work on the same topic, I didn't even know them. — Well, there’s your first problem.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.066240 | 2018-03-20T07:32:04 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/106754",
"authors": [
"Discrete lizard",
"JeffE",
"Nobody",
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"The Guy",
"Wrzlprmft",
"aparente001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47727",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50533",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72231",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"lighthouse keeper",
"user85361"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
109967 | How can I pass my PhD thesis defense when nothing has been successful?
For reasons I had very little influence on, most of the projects I participated in over the course of my PhD did not produce reasonable results. I managed to get involved in small side projects and publish at least something, but those are not very novel in itself and not "on the edge of knowledge".
The edge of knowledge I pushed is what could go wrong when you are a lone representative of a "service science" in a collaboration, who is asked for input in the beginning, but later overthrown. And in the end, we look at the data together and establish we can't do what we wanted with it. And part of the problem is in fact that my input was not that valued by decision makers.
This take-home message is more of a meta-topic and for sure not the main result of my thesis though.
In my thesis, I will (with a heavy heart) go through those projects and discuss them. Discuss what happened, what we did and what we should have done and could have done. This writing process is a very hard piece of work to do and is taking a toll on me right now. But I am doing it and trying to detach myself from the thoughts of how these failures could end up killing my dreams of an academic career.
In my defense, I am supposed to paint a picture-perfect representation of at least one major project. I don't have any options for this. I got caught in doing small "services" to help my collaborators and starting new projects ("we will do better this time") which always ran into a roadblock (mostly before I even got significantly involved).
I do not want to whine about science in my defense. I do not want to explain what went wrong, to the people who did it sitting in the room with a plan to cheer me through my presentation. But what can I do?
People usually find one "example" of what they did that worked out well and then "blow this up" to be the main point of their defense, while it might only be a small part of the work they did over the years. But I cannot find a single interesting topic with nice results. They are either trivial or failed.
Has anybody done a "fully failed" PhD defense ... and passed? How would one do this?
establish we can't do what we wanted with it — That is a positive result, not failure!
They are either trivial or failed. - If this is true, why does your advisor think you are ready to graduate?
@Kimball Because he does not see them as failed... much like JeffE. They are not "failed for all intents and purposes" and there is not nothing learned from them. The problem is more that it is fairly uncomfortable to have a defense talking only about problems you found. I don't want to be seen as the "one who criticizes research because she couldn't get results".
@skymningen I don't know your research, or your results. But try to be very clear in your own mind about the distinction between useful negative results, and "nothing learned" faliures. Remember that almost any negative result is useful, even if just in preventing somebody else from spending time on trying the same thing.
Also, "I am supposed to paint a picture-perfect representation of at least one major project": NO project is perfect, and if a PhD candidate claimed that their project was perfect - that nothing had gone wrong, and nothing could be improved in hindsight - some exaiminers might be surprised!
The specifics here are certainly best discussed with your advisor. They should know about your discipline, and how to frame results in a way that is suitable for the community.
Has anybody done a "fully failed" PhD defense ... and passed? How would one do this?
For me, it does not sound at all like you "failed" in your PhD. A PhD is a research project, not a product. Ultimately, you (and your committee) should not evaluate your results based on whether they ended up being useful, but based on whether you had a reasonable thesis and a thorough scientific study of this thesis.
That is, if you proposed a novel approach, collected reasonable data, and thoroughly validated your initial thesis, your research was successful, independently of whether this approach then ended up being used in the larger project context. Sure, it would be nice to be able to say that your approach has then helped these other people to do A, B, C, and D, but the real world does not always work like that.
To me, it is mainly a question of mindset. If you yourself consider your PhD "failed" you will have a hard time selling it to a committee. You need to embrace the idea that you did good research, and not measure the success of your own work on factors outside of your control. In that sense, you should defend what you did and why. You can, and maybe should, discuss why it ended up not being used if there are interesting lessons learned, but stay away from political or interpersonal arguments (these can indeed sound whiney). Stay positive and focus on what you did, not on how much other people then liked the results.
I do not consider my PhD failed and I am currently doing well with writing (only problem there is my broken heart as some of those projects I used to be passionate for). Maybe I should just bring up my ideas on how to do it better for each example where something went wrong, without specifying that I did mention those before it went wrong, just making clear that I know how to do better?
The short answer is yes and it is jokingly referred to a "PhD for Effort". More importantly is why it is ok.
Having projects fail teaches you what a bad project looks like
A big part of the reason a PhD helps you grow as a scientist is because in a PhD allows you to fail. I am fond of saying "getting a PhD means you have learned how to fail productively". In a company where they lose money when your experiments don't work, someone will come along and stop you if you are heading down an unproductive path. That makes the projects more likely to succeed, but it means you never had to figure out where things were going wrong. By banging you head against the wall for the last few years you have learned what a bad project looks like so in the future you will know when to cut the cord.
You may have actually failed because you are better
There are a ton of papers out there with unreproduceable results. It has become a big problem for a lot of the top journals. Sometimes this is due to chance, but at least some of it is due to things like unintentional p-hacking. It is possible at least some of your projects went wrong because you had better experimental design or because you did a better job of analyzing your data. If you could only get a PhD for positive results it would be discouraging good scientific practices.
Projects always look less impressive to the person doing them
You have been staring at your work for years. You know all the ins and outs and all the details. Of course nothing looks novel or interesting to you anymore, you know every result like the back of your hand. Try stepping away from it for a little while or getting some fresh eyes on the results. If that doesn't work, try explaining what you did to to a little kid. It is easy for things to feel small when you are explaining the details of the experiment, but when you have to simplify things down to the bigger themes you realize how much it ties in to your field. Some of the best defenses I have gone to were basically just a set of marginally related projects tied together with a good story.
Big picture summary
Even if you didn't get the results you wanted, you became a better scientist. That is why getting a PhD is part of your "education". Instead of being disappointed in the results, step back and let yourself get excited. With fresh eyes, you may realize you have more than you think.
Some of them definitely are unpublished because we decided not to fall into the trap of shady analysis, cherry-picking results or the likes. One is so far not published because I personally stated that I would not be okay with following a specific idea that could lead to (statistically very weak) results from rather bad input data because I consider the method to obtain this fraud or at least deception.
@skymningen Good for you; it sounds like the second section definitely applies. If you really feel like you can't pull together a story out of the results you got (which you probably can) focus on your good data analysis and how it kept you from going down the wrong path and led you to the less flashy but objectively more accurate conclusion. No professor is going to feel comfortable rejecting a candidate for good scientific practices and they shouldn't because it sound like you learned exactly what you were supposed to from your PhD.
@skymningen Also if you want to publish some of those well executed negative results, check out PLoS One. The journal explicitly has no impact factor requirements and encourages submission of negative results because they care deeply about the quality of the research as opposed to the impact of the results. I know the journal's founder personally and the type of results you are describing is exactly why he started the journal.
+1 in particular for "Projects always look less impressive to the person doing them"
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.066652 | 2018-05-18T13:01:07 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/109967",
"authors": [
"Barker",
"Flyto",
"JeffE",
"Kimball",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/92924",
"skymningen"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
13179 | How to better prepare myself for the application to masters degree programs in the U.S.?
I am an undergraduate student in China. I am currently a junior, majoring at Mathematical Economics and Mathematical Finance. My goal is to apply to a graduate school in the U.S. to learn Finance or Financial Engineering.
What can I do now to better prepare myself for the forthcoming application? How can I leave a good impression on the Admissions Committee? Except for higher GPA, GRE, Toefl, what else also make sense? To win a competition? To publishing papers? Or abundant internship experiences?
I know that the website of each school lists some requirements about the applicants, but those words are too general. Obviously there will be so many applicants who meet those requirements. What else need I show make myself outstanding, making them believe I am a good candidate? I am really puzzled.
Edit
I just want to obtain a master degree.
I also want to know that among GPA, GRE, TOEFL, competitions, publishing papers(if possible), good credible recommendation letters, etc, which ones deserve prior attention. It is unlikely for me to be that "superman".
End of edit
@VahidShirbisheh So I wish to be admitted into one of those top programs, which are worthy of the money.
Just some stories to share, I have two friends in the MFE program of CMU (one from NY campus and another one from Pit. Campus). One is from EE but she has lots of valuable internships (UBS e.g.) on finance. The other one is just like you, mathmatical economics field. Very high GRE score, many internships (although not very famous ones)
@perfectionm1ng Thank you for sharing. The MFE of CMU is exactly what I have been dreaming about. Could you provide more details on the applications and admissions of these two friends of yours?
@scaaahu I am desperate for more specific and authentic answers, and I will really appreciate it if you help me.
I think this is the best written and most on target "how to get into grad school" question I have seen.
@RenkeCai, please edit your question so it is clear that you want to do a Master's. If so, then the best advice (on top of what you already know like grades, competitions, etc.) is that given by Vahid in the comments -- save money, which may climb to $50K/year if you want to live in New York.
For a master degree, you need to prepare the money.
Aeismail’s answer points out that you need to foster contacts with people who can write letters of recommendation testifying to your potential as a researcher.
This is a definitely a good answer. However, it is hard to get good credible recommendation letters in China. You need to have not only strong academic performance but also strong social background to get them. The same is true for internship opportunities. When there are more than a hundred applicants competing for 3 internships, the best 3 academic performers with the strongest social background will get them. (The population in China exceeds 1.3 billion).
My answer to the question. How can I leave a good impression on the Admissions Committee? Besides high GPA, GRE and TOEFL scores, (and possibly winning a competition, publishing papers, abundant internship experiences) and good credible recommendation letters, the only thing I can think of is an excellent Statement of Purpose.
Use that statement to convince the admissions committee why you’ll be an excellent student in their school. Why are you interested in finance or financial engineering? What have you learned in undergraduate school? What particular research program in that school you are interested? What do you hope you can learn from that school after you get the master degree from them? What do you plan to do after master degree? Etc.etc. Hopefully, they will be convinced by this statement and then accept you.
This is my 5 cents worth. I sincerely hope experts here who are currently in the admission committees can give us more and effective answers.
Thank you for sharing about SOP. However, some questions like "What do you hope you can learn from that school after you get the master degree from them; What do you plan to do after master degree" really confuse me. In Chinese undergraduate schools we rarely get advice on career plans especially if we want to go abroad.
You also made me come across another question, which I have added to my post.
@RenkeCai You need to figure out what to do and why you want to do them in the future by yourself. No one can help you with that. Don't study something because they are hot (fire in Chinese term). Your future is in your hands. I am afraid I can't help you too much there. You indicate in your user profile you're eager to learn math. If math is what you really like to do, then do math. Don't study financial engineering just because it's hot. Once you figure out why you want to study finance/FE, you'll know how to write your SoP.
As your additional sub-questions, I suggest you to ask another question. GPA, GRE, TOEFL and recommendation letters are all required when applying for admission. If the master program is research oriented, publishing papers is important. If the program is geared toward application in industry, internship is more important. You need to ask another question to get more details, otherwise your question could be closed for too many subquestions (not good fit for stack exchange).
Assuming you are applying to graduate schools for the purpose of obtaining a doctorate, the best thing that you can do to improve your chances is to foster contacts with people who can write letters of recommendation testifying to your potential as a researcher.
Awards and prizes are certainly nice, as are graduate coursework, internships, and other experience. But, ultimately, none of those might provide any insight on your capability to do research. Doing research with members of your faculty (or at other institutions) and getting letters of recommendation from them allows a graduate committee to feel that they're taking less of a risk in admitting you.
Thanks for your attention. But I just want to obtain a master degree. I know those programs are really different from PhD.
You didn't mention that in your question! However, getting good letters of recommendation is still important. The only difference is that they should be tailored toward your potential to be a good master's student in the field you're interested in studying!
One worthwhile strategy (I found when applying to graduate school) is to examine the public profiles of graduate students at the institutions you want to attend. Graduate students (especially senior ones) often post their CVs online, and it's a good way to get information about what their profile was like when they applied.
Note, however, that it is extremely rare for people to list things like their GRE scores on a CV. However, many programs list useful aggregate data about their classes (perhaps what you mean by "lists some requirements about the applicants"), but at least in the case of Berkeley/Haas' MFE Program, the information is very specific averages for standardized tests and even work experience/industry prior to entry. Keep in mind that those are the averages for their class, not the minimums for acceptance, so they're a reasonable target to try and hit.
Since you already know the minimum requirements, I would recommend looking at the references being taught in the top Finance schools in the US. I have a friend who studied Finance in Europe and after coming to the US, he had to start studying another Master's in order to merge his knowledge to what is taught in the top Finance schools in the US.
Then you can write in your CV about the courses you have taken mentioning the references. Online courses, (e.g. from Coursera) are also very helpful for this purpose.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.067468 | 2013-10-04T09:27:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13179",
"authors": [
"Dilshan De Silva",
"Hameno",
"IanM",
"Mayank Bangia",
"Neil W",
"Nobody",
"ScarletAmaranth",
"Sibbs Gambling",
"StasK",
"StrongBad",
"Tad",
"Tarik",
"Ziyuan",
"aeismail",
"en_Knight",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2789",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33645",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33647",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33718",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33775",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35047",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35075",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35116",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35212",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35221",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35236",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8079",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8854",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"ranky",
"user2694186"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
30288 | What is the academic value of a white paper?
I am wondering what constitutes a white paper and what is the academic value of it.
I found some information here but I am more after turning an aspect of a research into a white paper.
Currently, the research is just for internal use. I am hoping the white paper will make it more visible and reach a wider audience.
The other reason is that I can then add it to my CV as a tangible output (if that is possible).
What is a "white paper"?
Some of the things that I have seen white-papers be useful for:
Position papers, manifestos, and other intellectual opinion statements.
Disseminating protocols, techniques, standards proposals, and other things that are useful but "below the threshold" of a normal publication
Seeding discussions with program managers and other potential funders and collaborators.
Date-stamping a piece of work so you can get it out of your queue and move on. Much better a white paper in an informal repository than a disreputable journal.
Sometimes white papers end up "upgrading" into proposals or publications of various types---sometimes very high impact publications. Sometimes they even draw a surprising amount of citations. Mostly, though, they are for the less formal side of scientific life. A well-regarded white paper sort of statement can change the course of an entire field.
One thing that I think is very important is, for any white paper that you are disseminating publicly, to get it into some archival location. There are a number of methods for this, from arXiv to standards RFCs to institutional technical report collections. If do this, it will be much easier for people to cite your white paper, pass it around, and generally disseminate it. And if it's persistent, you can feel much more comfortable adding it you your C.V...
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.068057 | 2014-10-20T22:21:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30288",
"authors": [
"Alaa'a Chem",
"Lina",
"Nahum",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83605",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83606",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83615",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91159",
"hugetable",
"user83615"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
40969 | Proper citation for industry resource
Following on from my question here where I develop industry resources under the auspices of my company, I am wondering what would be a suggested citation format that I can include in the publication itself (on the copyright and disclaimer page). This would be a further claim on my authorship of these resources.
An example of a resource is "Ten Key Considerations when Terminating Employees". The resource is available in hardcopy and electronically. My company name and logo appear on the first page. My company can be considered the publisher of this resource.
I mostly refer to industry resources as technical reports, and as I use BibTeX, I use the @techreport citation for that. If they're simply websites, I use @misc. Many citation styles will produce different results in how the reference is formatted, but I can think of the following example (that combines both the report and website, but you could leave the website out if that's not wanted):
J. Baker, 2014. "Ten Key Considerations when Terminating Employees". Technical report of <Company Name>. From: http://website.com/, accessed <date>.
Instead of technical report it could also be 'whitepaper' or 'brochure' or any other type, if you want to specify this.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.068238 | 2015-03-04T00:17:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/40969",
"authors": [
"Djames",
"Nir",
"Siddhartha Dam",
"guest",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110432",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110433",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110434",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110435"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
79088 | Grants: how to acknowledge collaboration, techniques from postdocs or students?
Grants for the NSF/NIH/many other government agencies often only allow people who are in "faculty-level" academic positions to be PIs and co-PIs*. When this is true, what is the best way of acknowledging a postdoc/student's contribution to the grant if they wrote large portions of it or made significant intellectual contributions? In addition, sometimes a postdoc/student has significant relevant experience that a PI lacks. What is the best way to highlight this, both to credit the postdoc and prevent reviewers from raising this as an issue? (I'm most interested in NSF here, but NIH/others would also be interesting.)
Possible answers:
- including the postdoc on the grant as a co-author, but not a co-PI (I believe this is possible for NSF)
- Highlighting the postdoc's skills in the proposal itself/including postdoc's bio.
- Adding a "letter of collaboration" from the postdoc. (If, for instance, the postdoc is in a somewhat independent position and can't be listed as personnel.)
(* This of course depends on the agency, the institution, probably even the type of grant.)
This question is essentially the PI-side version of this one: What to do when an advisor takes credit for a grant proposal?
Perhaps this can be generalized to other not-PI-eligible contributors, e.g. students, in addition to postdocs.
Fair enough - edited it. I think this is more common with postdocs, but definitely can happen with grads, too.
Regarding "sometimes a postdoc has significant relevant experience that a PI lacks", I have been referred to by name in (successful) NSF proposals I have co-authored to highlight some expertise I bring to the project, e.g.
ff524, a PhD student whose efforts have contributed to the research component of the project, will also be engaged in X. [insert my impressive background in X here]
or
This interdisciplinary collaboration is facilitated by ff524, a PhD student in Department A who has previously worked with PI X in Department A as well as with PI Y in Department B.
Presumably one could do the same with postdocs.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.068375 | 2016-10-31T00:29:45 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79088",
"authors": [
"AJK",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9892"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
7399 | Should you choose your committee members or should your advisor?
The question of how to choose PhD committee members has already been asked and answered in general terms, but I have the following more specific questions regarding the choice:
Is it more important that your advisor already know your committee members or that you do (e.g., your advisor knows them but you've never met them before vs. you know the member but your advisor doesn't have a strong or pre-existing relationship with them).
Is it better to get someone in your discipline or someone doing more related work (e.g., if you're getting a computer science degree, you ask computer science faculty vs. you're getting a computer science degree but everyone except for your advisor is from the English department)?
Should you pick people who are already invested/interested in you succeeding or is the dissertation process supposed to be a chance for you to win people over to your side?
There are many ways to build PhD committee, which depend on the local system (country, etc.) and your field. But, here are some general principles that should apply broadly. You need to bring a mix of highly competent yet diverse evaluators, with not too much proximity to yourself or your advisor lest it be thought that you are cherry-picking a partial (friendly) jury for your work.
Regarding your questions:
Is it more important that your advisor already know your committee members or that you do
I don't think it's a very important part of the decision-making. Certainly, you don't want the advisor's best friend (or yours!), that could make people think you're scared of unbiased questioning.
Is it better to get someone in your discipline or someone doing more related work
Here's one of the factors that play a very important part, for me, in picking committee members. First, all members need to be able to have a good understanding of your work. However, it is good that not all of them are precisely expert in particular field of expertise. It helps to have people from other (related) fields, because they will bring a different perspective, and give you the opportunity to highlight not only the very technical details of your work but also its significance for other fields.
is the dissertation process supposed to be a chance for you to win people over to your side?
No. It's good to bring people who don't necessarily agree with you on everything, but you should also avoid as committee members anyone overly critical of your approach of things, unless you know them well and they can keep it under control and agree to disagree. Otherwise, you risk that person actually coming to your defense to win you over. I have seen defenses being “derailed” (though all ended well) by a committee member who was overly argumentative, and it wasn't a nice experience for anybody involved.
You first have to check to see what the university rules are for a Ph.D committee. Many universities have rules that limit the number of external members, the number of members not from the department, the number of members that are not "regular faculty" and so on.
Assuming that you've checked all those constraints, then you should definitely discuss this with your advisor, who will have more experience in constructing committees in your area.
Which brings up another issue: community norms. In your field of research, are there customary roles that committee members play ? that's something you need to discuss with your advisor.
Finally, after all of the above, to answer some of your questions:
Should you already know them?
Not necessarily, although that helps with the first approach. It helps if they're familiar with your work even if you don't know them personally.
Should they be doing research related to your dissertation topic?
Not necessarily, but they should have some connection to your work, otherwise they won't be able to provide any kind of useful feedback for you.
Should they be in your discipline?
Definitely, unless your topic is interdisciplinary and you want the input from someone in the other discipline.
Should they be selected more for how much they'll help you get a job?
That's definitely a factor. It's not a critical factor for all members of your committee, but it can be a factor when looking for an external member. Ideally, if you're able to do some research with members of the committee, they can write a letter for you.
Bottom line:
talk to your advisor and discuss all of this with him/her
Different members of the committee can play different roles. The mix is what's important
This answer was very relevant to the original question, which was closed as duplicate. Now that the question was edited, I think this answer should too (or be deleted).
@F'x Let's let Suresh decide whether to edit or delete this answer.
It seems to me that the answers here address the edited questions as well (should you know the committee members, should they work in your area, etc etc)
I disagree slightly with your answer to "Should they be in your discipline?" Every thesis committee should have at least one member outside the student's subfield, if not outside their department, as a sanity check. They should be close enough to understand the vocabulary, but far enough away that they don't wear the same blinders as the student and their advisor.
@JeffE that's reasonable.
Should you choose your committee members or should your advisor?
Yes.
Choosing your committee is a collaborative process ideally, and should take place with input from your advisor, but also accounting for your own preferences.
The first thing you should do is check about the constraints on your committee put in place by university rules. This can be quite complex, and will often limit the freedom of choice you have in the selection process - for example, your hypothetical "Degree is in CS, everyone but your advisor is from English" example is simply outright impossible at the institution I got my degree from.
Is it more important that your advisor already know your committee
members or that you do (e.g., your advisor knows them but you've never
met them before vs. you know the member but your advisor doesn't have
a strong or pre-existing relationship with them).
Someone should know your committee members. That can be you, or that can be your advisor, but someone should know if they're likely to be problematic for this particular dissertation (it's a theory dissertation and they hate theory, etc.)
Is it better to get someone in your discipline or someone doing more
related work (e.g., if you're getting a computer science degree, you
ask computer science faculty vs. you're getting a computer science
degree but everyone except for your advisor is from the English
department)?
The "perfect" committee member is someone in your discipline doing related work. When those people don't exist, you should probably aim for a mix - you want a committee that can go "Yes, this is clearly a project worthy of a degree in $Discipline", but also people who can provide input on the specifics of your project.
Your advisor can probably talk to you about people who "should" be on your committee for various reasons, including political ones ("It will look strange if Y isn't on your committee...")
Should you pick people who are already invested/interested in you
succeeding or is the dissertation process supposed to be a chance for
you to win people over to your side?
Your committee should be people already interested in your success - believe me, even people really excited by your work and interested in you moving forward can cause problems. Someone whose an outright skeptic, and might be inclined to just dismiss the whole project? That is not someone you want on your committee. You have the rest of your career to try to win people over to your side after you have your degree.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.068566 | 2013-01-23T06:25:54 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7399",
"authors": [
"Apostle",
"Chuck",
"Dissenter",
"F'x",
"JeffE",
"Joe",
"Kelly",
"Params Raman",
"Shuby",
"Suresh",
"cansadadeserfeliz",
"elleen",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17613",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17614",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17615",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17623",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17624",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17653",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17654",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17658",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17659",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17660",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17661",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/186185",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/186357",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45236",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"nArA",
"qtwhat",
"user100464",
"user48819",
"user52817",
"Константин Пушкарев"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
98633 | Is it normal for collaborator to rerun experiments himself?
So I'm a few months into my PhD. It's built on top of previous work that has not been published. My supervisors, collaborators, and myself are working on to get this published. Now here's where things get a bit weird for me.
I found some problem with the previous work. Discussed the problem with my supervisors and have fixed them. For the publication, I'll need to redo the experiment.
So far I'm not getting a satisfactory result as it's tricky to get right. Not gonna go into why, it's just tricky.
My collaborator has been impatient with the result I'm getting. So now he has decided to rerun the experiment himself and double checking that he's getting the result I'm getting. Turns out it's quite similar. So now he's trying his own idea he has only briefly disclosed to me and one of my supervisor. When asked indirectly why he's doing this, he said he's just trying to understand the experiment better.
I found this disturbing. Why are you repeating my experiment yourself only to come and tell me you found exactly the same problem and result?
What's everyone take on this? I would like others opinions first before I discuss the issue with my supervisors.
I don't see a problem with this. Maybe your supervisors thought the idea will pan out, and just want to make sure you have not missed anything. Aren't three heads better than one?
The entire point of scientific testing and publication is to increase the knowledge people have, and to let others test your work for reproducibility. The collaborator is doing both - being able to say "independent reproduction of the experiment obtained similar results, so the authors changed ... and hence were able to ..." in the paper is a useful addition. It would only be suspicious if they did not tell you about the retest and alterations.
Like others here, I'm perplexed (and a little disheartened) by the fact that a PhD candidate would view independent replication of their research as "disturbing". Why do you see it that way?
While Nij and Nuclear Wang essentially wrote the most important points here, I would like to add that I, personally, would be very satisfied if someone rerun my experiment and got exactly the same result.
I think it is valid to reproduce several times unless https://xkcd.com/882/ ? :)
@ViktorMellgren: I don't get your comment. That comic shows that using a loose confidence interval sufficiently many times will likely result in fluke results. So it is valid and necessary to reproduce several times, which would reduce the likelihood of fluke results being taken for granted.
@user21820, exactly, I just thought it sounded like it. "not getting a satisfactory result as it's tricky to get right" i.e. doing it until the results shows what the author wants.
Isn’t running an independent experiment the way science is tested, and obtaining similar result the ultimate validation of the scientific outcome?
@ViktorMellgren: Ahh that's what you meant. Yep I fully agree!
I think one thing isn't clear. Is your collaborator getting the same UNSATISFACTORY results that you are getting? Independent reproduction of unsatisfactory results can just as meaningful as reproduction of satisfactory results. I would be concerned that what you consider satisfactory may not be reproducible because it is the result of random errors, and not because "it's tricky".
"I'm not getting a satisfactory result". So you have a problem with the paper. Oh no, he is trying to help fix the not yet working approach? Maybe he is even trying to understand why, to be able to eventually propose a solution to fix the paper? Sounds really bad to me, not.
i cannot see any probative reason to object to what your collaborator is doing. i think that if he/she sees you more of a collaborator and less a competitor, he/she would be more open and explicit with you about what they are doing and how that might get to a "satisfactory result" with the subject matter of the research. maybe if they shared more, you might be able to contribute more. don't be too much in love with your own theory or your own ideas. prefer the theory/idea that works best in experiment.
It should not be disturbing as replication is at the core. In practice it can be disturbing. In a perfect scenario this would go smoothly or even naturally and your question would not even arise.
I don't find that behavior strange at all. If I want to understand problems with algorithms (I don't do experiments with anything other than algorithms) I need to run them by myself and sometimes even implement the method from scratch. It's not that I do not trust other people's code, but if I want to understand all the mechanisms well, it's much easier to get a grip on it when I've done it myself.
The other way round, I do not have any objections if a coauthor of mine re-implements a method I already provided just to see how it works. On the contrary: Usually I benefit from this in one way or another, e.g. by learning new tricks or getting rid of bad programming style…
I can not upvote this enough as rewriting algorithms either by myself or co-authors is such an important aspect of producing an 'as good as possible' algorithm for the final manuscript/paper/study.
When I was a graduate student, I was working together with another student who implemented a rather complicated numerical simulation. To understand it better, and to do some additional experiments with this model, I decided to re-implement it myself. I was not able to get the same results as the other student. After a thorough review of my code, I found a minor mistake, and corrected it, but I still wasn't able to reproduce the other student's results.
In the end it turned out that the other student also had multiple mistakes. We fixed them, and finally everything matched up.
We had two independent implementations of the model we were studying, and finally they were giving the same result. Only at this point was I fully confident that our results were correct.
Double-checking makes a lot of sense. Mistakes happen, quite frequently. I would never trust a single result, either mine or someone else's, nearly as much as an independently verified experiment.
I have also worked in an environment where it was frowned upon to double check a coworker's work, claiming that "it is a waste of time". In reality, people were afraid that their work would be overtaken or stolen, and they were withholding data in order to prevent others from checking their result. In the end, it turned out that some results I was relying on were plainly wrong, which resulted in even more waste of time in the end. My advice is to try to avoid creating a toxic environment full of jealousy, like the one I experienced. Double checking is always a good thing.
In the last years there have been quite a few papers where experiments couldn't be reproduced later. Some people wouldn't want you to try to reproduce their experiments because they know they can't be reproduced.
Great answer, and this is exactly why we shall be a bit disturbed by papers using Wolfram software, given that they claim something like "implementation is not important, you just want to know the result".
I don't see any problem with your collaborators wanting to be sure of things. I also don't work in the experimental sciences but any time one of my collaborators emails me a page of mathematics, the first thing I do is check it line by line to make sure it's really true, and the second thing I do is try to improve it.
It sounds like there's a bit of a communication problem between you and your collaborator. Also, if your collaborator is an established researcher, they might be being a little impatient with you and forgetting that, as a brand new PhD student, it's going to take you a little longer to get things sorted out.
Talk to your advisor, as always. If you're upset by what your collaborator has done, tell your advisor about it. They'll either explain that things are OK, or agree with you and talk to your collaborator about it.
Is it normal for collaborator to rerun experiments himself?
Not only is it normal, I'd say it is highly recommended if you are able to do so. If not, either be extremely careful about verifying the vailidity of your coauthor's experimental procedure or qualify the experimental results' validity.
I'd also recommend that you endeavour to make your own experiments easily reproducible, so that your coauthors (and paper audience) can repeat them.
I am glad that your collaborator is coming up with the same results.
Are you concerned that your collaborator is attempting to take your ideas and add his own ideas in order to create a new derivative work? In the setting you describe this sounds like it might be difficult for him to accomplish.
On the other hand, many of the people that I have worked with are too lazy to run experiments independently. I might be a little bit concerned in your position.
My advice is to make sure that everyone you are working with are aware of his work, try to keep everything in the open so that it is harder to work against you, and to get published as quickly as you can, without sacrificing quality of course.
You took the words out of my mouth. He did not make his intention clear and was not sharing results with us unless i ask him to. Hence I was suspicious why would he do that.
You want as many people as possible tackling this problem: you, your collaborator, your advisor. If there's a potential problem with the result/experiment/paper you want to know all about it and fix it before you publish and have folks either correct you or rely on something that turns out not quite right years later.
You want those people working together (to help each other) and separately (so group-think doesn't shut out ideas(.
Well, scientific experiments are always subject to being repeated and cross-checked by others, so that in itself is not a problem. That's how science works. As for the etiquette of a "collaborator" re-running and double-checking your results, I guess that that all depends on the details. You didn't give much information on this collaborator. Who is he or she and does he or she have a legitimate and valid interest in seeing the experiment properly completed in a timely manner? If, for example, he or she is to be a co-author on a paper based on the experiment, perhaps that person has a legitimate interest in seeing the experimental problem resolved quickly. If that's the case, then I don't see any black-or-white answer to the problem. May be something that you, the person, and a supervisor will all have to iron out. Finally, if the person is pitching in to investigate the experimental problem, it may be a bit damaging to your ego but you should also realize that that person may be able to help in identifying the problem so that you can go on and graduate.
I would consider it unusual in many circumstances, you generally should trust your collaborators enough that you don't need to redo their experiments. It can be very useful to perform independent experiments to get higher confidence in the results, but that would be something that you discuss prior to doing the experiments.
In your case there is an important aspect that changes this. Your experiments aren't working correctly yet. Curiosity about this particular problem with the experiments is a plausible explanation for trying to reproduce your results. And from what I read, they're trying to find a way to fix this issue, and reproducing your results would be the logical first step for that.
You should consider this as useful information, as an independent reproduction also excludes a lot of sources for errors as your equipment, material and people are likely different. So this could help you to find the issue with your experiment quicker.
There is a communication issue here, and as already said in another answer, you should involve your supervisor to resolve that.
Agreed. Actually, it would be useful to know if the collaborator is in a different university. If they were in the same university, it would probably be better to get the experiment working by going to the student's lab and working together. But, if they're in a different city, that doesn't work so well and they could only really do it on their own.
Actually it depends a lot on the domain. If it is computer science, and experimentation means to run some software, it is very common (and should be expected) to redo the experimentation. If it was biology, and experimentation requires a complex & costly apparatus, things are different (but I don't know how)
@BasileStarynkevitch My point of view is from a biological/chemical domain, and the way the question is written does read more like experiments in a lab than running code on a computer to me, but it is not actually stated unambiguously in which domain the asker is working.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.069196 | 2017-11-09T03:23:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98633",
"authors": [
"Alchimista",
"Andrea Lazzarotto",
"Bas Jansen",
"Basile Starynkevitch",
"David Richerby",
"Has QUIT--Anony-Mousse",
"Jim",
"Maciej",
"Mad Scientist",
"Nij",
"Nuclear Hoagie",
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"Viktor Mellgren",
"famargar",
"gnasher729",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13651",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15940",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17690",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19385",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/201",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34226",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37800",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47727",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50067",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52451",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63518",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6887",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77771",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77973",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82604",
"robert bristow-johnson",
"user21820",
"woof"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
97336 | I am non-tenured and have been offered a tenure-track position at my current university, but I don't want to stay here long term. What should I do?
I work at a midwestern university in a very small department in a specialised field in the Humanities. I've been working here as a non-tenure track assistant professor, and have been offered a TT position.
I genuinely dislike the place I live in, not for aesthetic or social reasons, but because I have experienced racial harassment fairly consistently since last year (the area is extremely conservative, and does not look kindly on difference of any kind. I'm brown, female and immigrant). It got so bad I had to file a police report against someone who had been harassing me at my apartment. That's not the only instance, though. I've been abused on the streets and told to 'Go back home where I come from, you b*&T*h' while out running. Among other things.
I was offered an extension on my non-TT contract a while back and would give anything to go back to the non-TT track with the possibility of leaving for another TT position outside the university after an undoubtedly difficult application season or two.
I'm happy to continue working here, as I like teaching here, but I can't do this for another 20 years, which is what my department head talks about when he refers to the tenure track. I don't think I can live or work here for that long, no matter how nice it is to be wanted in the department. I've tried approaching him with a long list of the encounters I've had here, and he seems genuinely nice, but also said that there is nothing he can do, which I understand. Most faculty I discuss this with keep telling me to 'forget the racism, it's just a few idiots'. I can't be quite that sanguine about it. They don't seem to understand the psychological effects of living in a place where you run the risk of harassment every time you step out of the house.
And yes, I get that the market is bad. By dint and design, however, I work on a rather niche subject which IS rather marketable.
I am rather anxious about taking this offer, and was wondering what to do. Any tips or advice would be much appreciated.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
Related: Just got tenured and promoted, but need to move for family reasons, The etiquette of leaving a faculty position, Proper “notice period” for resigning a tenure track position?, plus probably several others I can't find, on moving on to other institutions after getting a tenure-track job.
There's nothing to prevent you from accepting the TT position (which presumably carries better pay and more prestige) while still pursuing positions elsewhere. Indeed, having a tenure-track position may improve your chances of getting an offer outside, or may increase the leverage you have to bargain with if offered something elsewhere. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with accepting the TT job and then leaving (after a year) for another position. Your department head might not be happy, but this kind of thing is not viewed negatively by the academic culture at large.
In short, I see no downside for you to accept the tenure-track offer.
Thanks, that does help clarify things. I was worried looking for something might mark me down as flaky. But, thanks.
Isnt rule that if you refuse an offer you are fired?
Im not sure what you mean, SSimon. David recommended taking the job offer and going back on the market. Neither the answer nor my comment mentioned refusing an offer. And yes, Im sure in most places that is the case, generally speaking.
In my field, and I’m not sure how universal this is, accepting a position is only a firm one-year commitment on your end. That is if you accept the position you shouldn’t be still looking this application cycle because you’ve committed to teach next year, but you’re free to find another job the next cycle if you want.
When you leave your tenured position, perhaps also mention that it is due to the hostile environment. It's important that people know that among other things, the local racism makes it hard to attract and keep excellent scientists (and probably other excellent workers).
I agree with this answer overall, but want to note that it might not be entirely so simple. If the chair or other faculty probe your personal commitment to staying, that could be a little bit uncomfortable. I don't believe that you should be penalized in your career because of the environment outside of the department or university, however.
I completely disagree of the blanket statement there are no downsides "at large". The asker is in the humanities, but in the sciences and engineering, a TT position comes with startup money to establish a lab. Spending the money and leaving before the department can reasonably recover its costs will burn a lot of bridges, and word will get around to future departments.
I would not just accept that the tenure track position carries better pay and more prestige. Industry is infamous for "promoting people to management" to get out of paying overtime. Tenure track does not provide job protection but in fact specifies that the tenure track faculty must be fired within a couple of years absent a successful tenure application. Prestigious schools have a low tenure acceptance rate and a cynical mid-tier school might try to game their statistics to look more prestigious by converting all their non-tenure track faculty to tenure track and then denying them tenure.
Tenure-track is a commitment from the school to you that in sixish years you will be fairly evaluated and if you are found to match the standards set out be awarded tenure. The candidate is not promising their career to the school, they are only promising one year. That said one shouldn’t apply for jobs unnecessarily and one might need to take care in putting out feelers in a way that won’t make your colleagues upset. But the bottom line is that the school isn’t being promised that if it’s up to standards the candidate will never leave, the school is making the promise to the candidate.
@henning The hostile outside of university environment. People who talk about hostile work environments can be treated as problem employees; people who say that people outside of work made the location unsustainable. Be ready to deal with "well, there are racists here too" problem where someone doesn't hire you because they figure you won't want to stay there either (on the other hand, that could be a big plus!)
An answer to the general question (the one in your title):
Tenure track positions should be the default - they essentially mean you don't get arbitrarily fired. So, you've just been offered a regular position. Take it. If you later decide you want to leave, then you'll leave.
Adding the specific information about racism and harassment:
Well, one option you could consider is actively fighting against racism - in the university and in the community. As a TT you'll be in a better position to do this, as well as to promote and support others - students, graduate researchers, teachers (in the university) and public figures / community organizers (outside the university) when they do the same or when they're targeted. Now, I realize not everyone can/wants to shoulder this burden, so it's perfectly^H^H^H^H^H^H somewhat understandable if you decide not to. In that case - still, take the job. Look for another position on the side, and if one comes up - then you'll have a proper decision to make among two concrete alternatives.
I've been abused on the streets I am not sure the university is the place the OP encountered racism. And I am not sure you had lived in that kind of place before. I am a Chinese male. I used to live in the deep south of the US. I had encountered numerous similar incidents the OP did. May I tell you it's not that easy to live in that kind of place. At least, I couldn't. This is why I left the US.
@scaaahu: 1. Edited my answer accordingly. 2. Indeed, I've not lived there, which is why I didn't claim that was the right thing to do. But - there are plenty of non-white people for whom it's not so easy to just go elsewhere, and they will have to stay and bear it... so it's at least a valid option.
Good points, @einpoklum, I especially mean the one about actively fighting racism. I am active on campus in diversity initiatives, and teach and train on diversity. Increasingly, though, Im realising that some deep-rooted ideas will be resistant to our efforts on campus. And another faculty of color on campus was doxxed for their anti-racism work and needed police protection for a few weeks. All things considered, it seems a tense time to be in this part of the world, and not look and talk a particular way.
+1 for mentioning "Well, one option you could consider is actively fighting against racism - in the university and in the community". Obviously this is a difficult path, and no-one would criticise the OP for deciding not to go down that path, but it is a good option to suggest.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.070308 | 2017-10-14T04:38:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97336",
"authors": [
"E.P.",
"Mars",
"Noah Snyder",
"Nobody",
"SSimon",
"Yakk",
"einpoklum",
"emory",
"ff524",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49750",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/60144",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81298",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/820",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9370",
"juno41",
"user",
"user71659"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
104522 | Is it okay to give link of my recent paper in the cover letter for a postdoc application?
So I am applying for a postdoc position and I happen to be working on a problem that is quite closely related to PI's interests. I don't just mean that we share the same field/subfield (which we do anyway) but rather the problem that I worked out is an advancement of what he (and some other people) is doing. This makes my case particularly strong since he wants to work on related questions.
Now, I recently uploaded a preprint of my this work and I was thinking that if I highlight this paper in the cover letter for the application, my application would stand out. Including a direct link to the preprint sounds like an option to me. However, I have never seen a cover letter with links to papers. Is this possible and acceptable?
I do this in my research statement.
Can you explain why you think this might be impossible or unacceptable?
While I've only been on the applicant side of things, I expect that it would be fine to include a link. Different PIs will react differently, of course, but it seems unlikely to ruin your application. Just make it clear from typesetting that it is a link. Given that the PI might only look at the printed version you should probably make the link text self-explanatory as well, e.g. using an arXiv identifier. However, depending on the method of submission you might be able to just attach the preprint of interest to your application. I expect that this is the ideal approach, when possible.
As support for using links, see this Nature Jobs blog post
When you’re reading an article online you’ll often find links to relevant content that is outside the article. This technique can be used in your cover letter too. Use links to information such as your research lab website, or your online portfolio and research papers. You can even link to specific papers that have been highly cited or extra-curricular projects you’ve been a part of. Let the employer know that there is so much more to you that what appears on that flat piece of paper!
If you describe why your recent research work is significant and relevant to your application, and if it's significant to actually look at the paper itself, then why not? As someone who reads an application I'd find it quite reasonable.
On the other hand, I've set the key sentence in boldface. If it's not obviously important to go look at the paper itself, then providing the link seems weird at best, or vain at worst.
Caveat: I'm not tenured and don't have experience reading cover letters, only writing a few of them.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.071390 | 2018-02-25T17:09:18 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/104522",
"authors": [
"Oleg Lobachev",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75",
"kmm"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
96608 | PhD without compulsory publications hurting profile
At the University of Cambridge, PhD students are not required to publish papers in order to be able to defend a thesis. One consequence of this is that some supervisors, especially in more experimental areas (e.g., some fields of biology), adopt a policy of deferring all publications until after the end of the PhD, to suck up as much of their students' time as possible for lab work.
This has a detrimental effect on the PhD's career: at the end of the PhD, he/she cannot apply to most positions since virtually all of them require publications. So the student must convince the supervisor to leave extra time for publishing during the thesis, and some supervisors are clearly against it.
In such situations, what can the PhD student do? In theory, if there was postdoc funding available for the student immediately after the thesis, this could be allocated for publishing the accumulated results, but this is not the case.
Is there a way to pressure the university to require such publications, to minimize the amount of "paying technician"1 work? How can PhD students change this perverse incentive system?
1At Cambridge, PhD students in such fields end up paying to work (as technicians), instead of being paid to work, which is a huge incentive for supervisors to keep the status quo.
Don't go to Cambridge?
Requiring publications for all students, in order to fix things for some students, seems like a bad idea. (Students in some fields may be able to get academic jobs without any publications; some students may be interested in other kinds of jobs that don't require publications; etc.) Why not try to pressure the department/individual advisors instead?
@Azor-Ahai this is unfortunately something that is not clearly spelled out, so prospective PhD students can't know about it. Also, it is specific to some supervisors/areas, so it's hardly if ever spoken about. Once you've invested 3 years of your life in it, you'll try to find better solutions than just throwing it all away.
@ff524 there have been attempts to persuade said supervisors, but they didn't work. I'm hoping there are other solutions I haven't thought about, hence the question.
@ff524 also, I believe that the default should be to publish during the PhD, but exceptions could be taken into account. This would require such dodgy supervisors to actually justify their deviations. Thus, the default would be to protect the students, but allowing for exceptions when justified.
You might want to detail what those attempts were, and what the results were - some people here might have other suggestions. (This question is phrased sort of like "How I can I solve X by doing Y" - I think it would be better as "How can I solve X", and let people propose Y or other good ways.)
Surely the name Cambridge, your supervisor(s)' good name, and their recommendation letters give you more mileage than someone from a lesser known or lower ranking university with publication(s).
"he/she cannot apply to most positions since virtually all of them require publications": This isn't necessarily a true statement.
"Surely the name Cambridge, your supervisor(s)' good name": maybe the name isn't all that good if they follow this kind of practice.
As a PhD student at Cambridge, I am aware that journal publications aren't required in the sense that it is written explicitly that you must have them to graduate, but my advisor would kick me out immediately if I said I didn't want to publish anything in a journal. You need to speak with your division or department head and argue your case.
@anol: "[T]is is unfortunately something that is not clearly spelled out, so prospective PhD students can't know about it." Is it not common for prospective PhD students to visit and talk to current PhD students? If current PhD students feel that their careers are being held hostage to their advisors, shouldn't they inform prospective students about this? If current students really feel that their careers are suffering, shouldn't they consider transferring to another program? Not always easy, but if you got into Cambridge, you can probably get in somewhere else.
@Prof.SantaClaus Oh god, I hope not. (At least, not if the applicant from the lower-tier university also has strong rec letters.)
Programs do get reputations.
And a program that produces good students who don’t have publications, especially if they are a well known school, will still have good placement rates.
Faculty too can get reputations, positive and negative.
Post-doc and hiring committees take these reputations into account when evaluating applications. If we know a school or a particular faculty member produces (otherwise stellar) students who don’t have publications, we’ll use other criteria to evaluate them.
The same thing goes for faculty who are known to write over the top recommendations and those who write acerbic ones. They all get calibrated in the end.
Where it does hurt you is with industry positions as there, reputations aren’t as well known.
I don't know how you can change institutional norms, but with regard to your own career, I imagine that proving you can publish might be worth fighting for. That is, you may not be able to publish multiple papers as a student of this advisor, but is there some way to get a single paper out the door?
It sounds like it's worth having a difficult conversation about. Something like "Advisor, I really appreciate the training I'm getting in your lab. I feel confident that I'll be able to [stain my own cells, kill my own rats, etc.] on my own, when I have my own lab. But I want to learn how to get through the peer review process, too. Can we work on publishing a paper together, so I can see how you work through the process? I want to learn from your experience while I have the opportunity." That's one angle.
Another angle (and I am aware that this is a sort of a "pull yourself up by your bootstraps," "work harder" kind of answer, and you're probably already trying to fit 25 hours into a day), is there some way to minimize the amount of time spent doing technical work? Even another hour a day might allow you to have a paper (at some stage in the review process) on your CV by the time you are applying for jobs. A paper under review would show that you can publish, and that, with your letters and institution's reputation, might get you where you want to be.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.071644 | 2017-09-27T20:58:41 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96608",
"authors": [
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"Forgottenscience",
"JeffE",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"aeismail",
"anol",
"darij grinberg",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35360",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47727",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67179",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
46792 | Do I have to implement published algorithms in the same manner as the original source?
If you want to optimize a technique used in a given publication, is it considered necessary to use the same programming language and data sets?
Please don't use chat speak in posting here. I've also removed the parts about k-means and movie data sets, since that's particular to your project and therefore off-topic here.
Not really I thought this is academic and asking about the rule of research...Thank you that looks much better
Well, that kind of obscures things, too, because now you have a question asking about references for k-means, and one asking about the need to use the same programming language. At any rate, the questions about clustering, etc., is probably better suited for Cross Validated, the SE site devoted to statistical analysis.
Necessary for what ends, or as imposed by which set of rules?
You don't need to use the same programming language, but it would be wise to use the same data sets (if available), to check that you get the same results and to compare performance. Of course, you may want to use additional data sets.
It depends on the goal of your work.
If you want to use the algorithm for something else and just as one piece of the puzzle, you are free to implement it however you want. Especially with popular algorithms you will find that mostly only the very basic idea survives. The algorithm itself changes a lot over time with different improvements of various researchers.
If the algorithm itself is the core of your research, you should definitely keep all the same language and data sets to make your results comparable. If you then for example want to try it out in a different language, you should compare it to the original implementation.
I am going to assume that "optimize" means "improve upon" (otherwise the entire question is meaningless).
Then the question is, what do you want to prove? Is it that your algorithm is better? In this case you would be well advised to stick to the original programming language. If you do not, it will be hard to counter the criticism that your performance improvements are due not to your own hard work, but simply to different efficiencies of the programming languages and/or compilers.
Sometimes the goal of the experiments is, in fact, to show the superiority of one programming language over another, see, e.g., http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/ijoc.2.2.152. In this case, of course you would be free to use a different programming language.
That you should use the same data set in either case goes without saying.
I don't quite get the point of your second paragraph: even when not changing the language, you could always claim that the new algorithm just happens to be better suited for the optimizations performed by the compiler.
@DCTLib. Sure, but how would you prove that? Besides, this would be a very narrow contribution. I doubt it could be published.
No, I meant the reviewer could claim that. Regardless of whether the new implementation is in a different language or not, the engineering part may have been performed in a better way, and so regardless of whether the new implementation is in the same language, the reviewer may doubt that the new algorithm is intrinsically better.
@DCTLib. Have a look at the reference I linked. I believe the author addressed that, although new language features have made the article dated if not obsolete.
It's not totally clear what is the meaning of the phrase "optimize a technique", thus, it is difficult to tell, especially since it is most likely discipline- and, even, context-dependent. However, regardless of the above, technique, by definition, is independent of programming language (at least, IMHO it should be), so my answer to that part is No.
In regard to data sets, the situation is also rather fuzzy, as that also depends on domain, context and, perhaps, other factors. Nevertheless, I would suggest considering using the same data set (so, my answer to that part is Yes), if possible, along with a rather standard approach of splitting it into two (training and test) or three (training, validation and test - so called "three-way data split") subsets (that is, of course, if you perform relevant data analysis).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.072264 | 2015-06-07T20:13:37 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46792",
"authors": [
"Bashir",
"DCTLib",
"Emma",
"Icarus",
"Jordano Zang",
"Khashayar Baghizadeh",
"Lazloo Xp",
"O. R. Mapper",
"SDS0",
"Shiladitya Bose",
"TTS Lương Thị Thu Sang",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128935",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128936",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128937",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128941",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128942",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128945",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128946",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129023",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129027",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129292",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129296",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31433",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35577",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7390",
"lof",
"philo",
"user1215237",
"user3697176",
"wvandertoorn"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
40790 | What is the purpose of an e-book with random verbatim abstracts pulled from journals?
I just found an abstract of mine, copied from a Journal, in an online book titled "Issues in Ecological Research and Application." It looks like this is a free book to download that just has random abstracts from various ecology journals. However, it appears like it doesn't take every single abstract from these journals. This company appears to also do this for many fields.
Actually, it is a bit stranger than full abstracts, it's basically full abstracts broken up with phrases like "journalists obtained a quote from researchers at University '..."
So my questions are, how did my abstract get in such a book? And what is the purpose of such a book? Abstracts are freely available online everywhere. Back in the print days, I could, perhaps, see the purpose of a library owning such a thing, but I can't quite understand what this is used for. Also is this even legal and should I be concerned about such things?
Well, it sounds like it's worth every penny that you paid for it.
I don't know if it's legal (it could depend on what counts as fair use, for example), but I wouldn't be concerned. I don't see any likelihood that this will harm you.
It's possible that they asked the journal for permission to reprint the abstract, but I'd guess they just grabbed it from the web. The "journalists obtained a quote" stuff may be intended to make it look like a press release or news article, rather than a reprinted abstract. One positive side effect is that this makes it clear that the publisher is quoting you describing your work, rather than that you chose to publish an abstract in this venue.
I don't know why the publisher would compile these volumes. They have no academic value whatsoever, but it's easy to speculate about motives:
If these volumes are assembled by programs scraping the web, then the publisher only needs to sell a handful of them to make a profit. With thousands of volumes available, they can presumably find a few suckers who will pay for one, or perhaps even careless librarians they can sell subscriptions to.
Maybe the volumes are used for content farming, to try to mimic genuine content and thereby attract web searchers (so the publisher can sell ads or otherwise exploit these visits).
They might also be used to create the illusion of academic respectability for the publisher, by creating a big catalog full of books that look reasonable at first glance (but not at second glance).
It could be someone who is genuinely trying to perform a useful service and simply doesn't recognize how useless this is.
If this bothers you, you could bring it to the attention of your publisher. If they didn't authorize the use of the abstract, then they'll decide whether they can or should do anything about it.
But it claims to be a free download here. I think it's got more to do with your points 2&3 than 1 - perhaps on the way to trying for some gain.
Looking at their sites and related content, it looks like #1 and #4: they appear to run a system that creates algorithmically-generated news digests, and are now applying it to academic publishing as well.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.072663 | 2015-03-01T03:00:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/40790",
"authors": [
"Ayanthika",
"Chris H",
"J.V.",
"Kobe Zhou",
"Nag",
"Pete L. Clark",
"euwblame",
"henreetee",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109928",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109930",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109935",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109936",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109940",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8494",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"jakebeal"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
192571 | Removing unreal/gift co-authors previously added because of academic bullying
Someone under my pastoral care asked me the following, wishing to remain anonymous: I had published several papers with my so-called supervisors before, during my PhD, both of whom never actually contributed a single word/idea/method/anything of value or even read or edited those papers; nor would they have been capable of contributing a single word in the first place. As a PhD student I was implicitly coerced to include their names as gifts as honorary co-authors or else I would not have received any institutional support (namely residence permit and contracts).
Now I have come of age and emancipated myself from that abusive relationship and become an academic myself. I badly want to remove these unreal authors' names from my publications to end this history of abuse and set an example for fighting against academic bullying and harassment!
How would you suggest someone do this!? I am aware of similar questions such as this one but none of them exactly cover the case of the unfortunately very common 'extorted gift authorship' phenomenon.
What field does this refer to? Standards vary. Math is very different from big science fields.
@Buffy: This is an interdisciplinary domain involving math, computer science, and a domain-specific area of work generally called the "built environment"; so yes, it is not medicine or pharmacology so this type of fraud is just a supposedly innocent type of fraud that is not supposed to harm anyone and so it is very common in this field.
Frame challenge: if your goal is to correct an abusive history and to lobby against this sort of academic arrangement, you can accomplish that by describing these past circumstances publicly and possibly repeatedly. Literally removing their names from the publications is a different goal (and an understandable one), but given how taxing and unlikely it will be (as Wolfgang Bangerth describes in their answer), you might consider this alternate route to your stated goals.
I upvoted, because it seems a relevant question to me. But I advice to follow Wolfgang's and Buffy's answers.
Don't seek vengeance, or try to change history. It's totally sufficient to help make sure it doesn't repeat itself.
Water under the bridge. Move on.
Is there anything else to the story than being implicitly coerced into including some authors in your paper that didn't actually contribute? If not, it would be greatly exaggerated, and quite disrespectful to anyone who has been abused or bullied, to call that a "history of abuse", an "abusive relationship", "bullying" and "harassment". Contributing to fraud and aiding those abusing the publishing process (but not abusing you) simply because you believe this to be the best/only way to get published would be none of the above things.
@NotThatGuy: do you really think a foreign PhD student on a temporary visa who is underpaid has the power to say no to any indecent proposal, whether academic abuse or other forms of abuse? I think I have to have made the case abundantly clear (and I would expect it to be clear to a fair observer) that the victim of the abuse is not to blame. A person of high status takes advantage of the disadvantages of those lower in the pecking order. What else needs to be explained? I suppose that is a familiar story that is generally referred to as abuse of power.
@FatherGeppeto Whether or not someone has "the power to say no" may be an important part of whether or not something is abuse, but it's not the only criteria. Otherwise one could argue that being "coerced" into wearing pants is also abuse. We all do things to fit in, that we may not have wanted to do in our ideal world. Which is not to say we shouldn't challenge those things, but certainly there's more to something being abusive than that. And I also didn't say they are "to blame", but rather merely that it doesn't seem like it should fall within a reasonable definition of "abuse".
This will be an unsatisfactory answer, but my suggestion is to focus on the future rather than the past.
To do what you want to do is going to be an endless task where people will be reluctant to do what you suggest from beginning to end, with no guarantee that it will actually happen, and generating ill will all around. Fundamentally, publishers will not want to do what you want because they have published a paper as is under the assumption that authorship was legitimate. To change that after the fact will require proof that authorship was fraudulent. I can only imagine that your co-authors will not be willing to sign corresponding legal affidavits so the question becomes: How will you provide this kind of proof? The point being that publishers will want you to prove that these other people shouldn't have been authors, rather than them to prove that they deserve authorship.
It is probably easy to see that this will not be an easy process, will require millions of emails to be written and read, possibly lawyers, and a process at the end of which everyone is aggravated by the amount of time and money lost. Whether you can actually succeed with the quest remains questionable, but for sure everyone (editors, your illegitimate co-authors, the legitimate co-authors that will be dragged into the process, university administrators who might have to deal with this) is going to be unhappy and you will have a dozen or two well-meaning colleagues and friends less than you had before.
So I get why you want to do it, but my advice is to not do it anyway because the costs in terms of money, time, and friendships are going to be too high. Rather, my suggestion is to focus on what you can achieve: Be a role model, and set ethical standards for those around, going forward in your interaction with your colleagues and students. That is a worthwhile use of time and energy, and it will win you friends.
I hope that the OP does not find your excellent answer to be unsatisfactory. To hear from experienced academics like you that it is good practice to "forget the negative past and look forward to a positive future" should be an encouragement to peacefully move forward.
This might be the right action for any individual actor, but hurt 'the academic world' as a whole. Apologies for the comparison, but this reminds me very strongly of rape allegations, where I know someone personally who didn't speak out because she was afraid of it being a 'her word vs his word' scenario. The thing though is that without speaking out you never discover that N other people likely had the same encounter with the person in question.
@DavidMulder I don't read this as "don't speak out". Absolutely you can speak out about those people; but whether you take legal action unfortunately does (in all cases) depend on your chances of success. If it's as intensely damaging as rape, many people will pursue this anyway (and I applaud them for it). The OP simply is not in that situation though - any rational person can clearly see that the imagined slight against them is trivial. If the OP thinks it's that serious, then frankly the OP needs to get out more.
@DavidMulder The main difference is that rape is a serious crime, while being a shitty supervisor and receiving undeserved authorships is something non-academics won't even care about. Besides, going in prison is a pretty sizeable stick, while here the worst punishment could be removal of co-authors' names from papers. So, even IF it works in the best way, the person was successfully knocked down by few papers and several citations... and nobody even notices as they still have hundreds of papers and several thousand citations.
@ZizyArcher Fraud and Rape are of course completely different. The social backlash you can get when you accuse someone of rape is indeed on a completely different level as just sharing your knowledge of someone's fraudulent behavior. Regardless, as I was saying: "This might be the right action for any individual actor". My main point was just to acknowledge that this becomes harmful when one assumes the recommended behavior would be a universal law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative).
@Graham Just for your idea, only around 30% of sexual assaults get reported (I think I heard that's the lowest rate of any serious crime). Regardless, I absolutely read this answer as suggesting "Don't speak out, (let them do it to future victims) and just be a better role model for your own students"
@DavidMulder That largely depends on how much you consider the OP to be a "victim" and how much you consider their supervisors to be "abusers". The OP has suffered no harm, neither physically nor mentally nor morally nor professionally. (I don't think this is even open to discussion based on the question.) On the contrary, they have received financial and professional benefits directly due to the support of those honorary co-authors promoting their work. At most this is a trivial annoyance. And that's even before we start asking whether the OP's assessment of their supervisor is correct.
@Graham Okay, if you want to frame it as 'The friend of the OP is one of the abusers' (getting the financial and professional benefits in return for participating in the fraud) and the victim is the scientific community, then yes, maybe they indeed aren't the victim. Considering they were in a position of 'weakness' however I take some issue with not considering them victims. "And that's even before we start asking whether the OP's assessment of their supervisor is correct."... and my comparison with rape has just gotten even stronger and more painful
I wished the association with rape had not been made above -- it's hard to get out of that connection again in continuing the debate in these comments.
But regardless, I did not mean to imply staying silent. There is a difference between having success by speaking out and having actual success in getting authors removed. The principal difficulty with the latter is that the authors signed a legal affidavit that their paper submission satisfies the usual ethical standards. Overturning this is not the same as a "he says she says" case.
@DavidMulder I'm not sure why you chose to compare it to rape. Me, I compare it to a spoilt child whining "I didn't want to wash my hands but my big sister made me. Mummy, tell her not to." And the scientific community isn't suffering because the co-authors are signal-boosting a paper they consider worthwhile, which otherwise might never have been noticed. That's their contribution.
@WolfgangBangerth That's why I was apologizing whilst making the comparison. I sincerely think there are useful similarities, but I did realize the dangers of making such a comparison from the start . Regardless, I think we're in agreement (I agree with you that actually getting a name removed is unlikely given any individual's actions).
@Graham I have few words for you defending authorship fraud. I have never heard of a field where 'signal boosting' would be a valid reason to be a paper's author. As far as I am concerned authorship fraud is exactly the same as plagiarism (In both cases you claim you authored something that you actually didn't author). If plagiarism is reason enough to kick people out of the scientific community, then authorship fraud should be all the more reason to kick them out as soon as possible.
@DavidMulder Indeed, but even a very direct legal or disciplinary action against the bulliers may be more sensible and more likely to succeed than trying to remove authors from a paper without the former happening first. If the people need something that calls for punishment, do something that makes real sense and has potential to stop them for the future. Removing them from one paper is not such a thing and will be extremely hard to achieve. If you want to stick to your rape analogy, you do not punish a rapist by removing their name from a paper or from some movie credits but through police.
@DavidMulder It is totally normal for a supervisor to not be closely involved with their student's work; but the supervisor is certainly involved with setting/approving the project, monitoring progress and methodology, and promoting the work afterwards. This is the "signal boost" I mentioned. The student here is suggesting they have literally never spoken to their supervisor during their entire PhD. This implies gross negligence from the university institutionally, from the supervisor personally, and also from the student who (if this is true) is not aware of how to work with others.
@DavidMulder ... You can argue whether the supervisor's contribution is enough to warrant co-authorship, of course, but this does not make it fraud or plagiarism. It is very common for students to underestimate their supervisor's input - it's possibly the top theme on this board. Which is where I come back to "asking whether the OP's assessment of their supervisor is correct".
If, as you say in a comment, this is very "common in this field", then you are probably stuck with it. It is difficult to overcome common practice in a field, even if it makes little sense. It is probably impossible for an individual to overcome on their own due to the likely and possibly severe blowback.
If you have enough standing in the field to absorb that blowback then you might make a stab at it, but an early career individual could be damaged I fear.
So, my suggestion is to let it go as a matter of self preservation.
One thing you can do, however, is refuse to accept gift authorship in any form when offered.
I'm surprised, honestly, to see that this happens in a math or CS related field. Like you I don't like the practice.
Note that in some fields, supervisors and PIs are so "honored" because they provide the environment, such as a lab and the funding, that makes the research possible. Though they may contribute little to an individual paper, they set the overall framework in which it becomes possible to do the research leading to that paper. I still don't care for the practice, but understand that it is common and accepted in some fields.
I agree with the general tone of your answer, I would like to stress that the "because they provide the environment, such as a lab and the funding, that makes the research possible. " is usually (and ethcially) taken care with the fact that if you work in a lab, you are probably working on some continuation of past experiment/ideas, so you provide citations to the lab's publications. In fact, to have always the Lab PI in the authors'lists can even be counterproductive (if one really really wants to do an objective evaluation based on citations, and one filters out the self-citations...)
I will not repeat the points made in the excellent answers by Wolfgang Bangerth (it is too legally complex to deal with; just focus on the future) and Buffy (let it go and resolve never to do unto others as they have done unto you), both of whose perspectives with which I wholeheartedly agree. I do want to add a complementary point, though.
I, too, have a couple of coauthorships from my PhD days that do not merit it (though not as bad as your case). Thankfully, my supervisor was a genuine and very active coauthor, but there were a few other professors in my program that got their names on some of my and my colleagues' papers whose names should not be there.
I hope that I am not reading too much into your question, but if your feeling is something like what mine has been, there might be a sense of dishonesty when you look at your list of papers and you see a name that you know ought not to be there. If that is your case, then I will address how I address the unease of conscience. In my case, my CV is my CV and so I list the publications to which I know that I honestly contributed. If ever a particular paper comes up in discussion, then I will be honest and admit that some coauthors did not do much and that their names are only there because of PhD student pressure. So, with that, my conscience is clear.
Remarkably, such a scenario has never come up--not even once--concerning any of these papers. That is, no one has actually asked me about these specific papers such that I have needed to explain their background. One reason that it has never come up is that I do not have any vengeful sentiment that I need to "expose" these professors. So, I do not look for opportunities to bring it up. And none has ever come up.
So, echoing the advice of some other respondents, I recommend that you leave the past in the past and look forward to a future career where you can be an example of how to properly respect your junior colleagues. Beyond that, I strongly urge you that when you learn of junior colleagues being abused in such ways, you do your best to intervene to prevent such abuse from being done to others. That way, the past negative experiences that you have suffered can have a productive outcome in you being an advocate to prevent such behaviours from being repeated by others.
@FatherGepetto, I will address the anonymous person under your pastoral care in the second person, as though they had asked the question.
Proof?
I had published several papers with my so-called supervisors ...
Are you claiming they weren't your supervisors? Likely not. So let's call them your supervisors. If you are claiming you weren't supervised, that would be a different question.
... during my PhD, both of whom never actually contributed a single word ... or even ... edited those papers;
Maybe that's true, but - can you prove it?
never actually contributed a single ... idea/method ... or even read ... those papers;
Even if this were true, this is effectively impossible to prove about your supervisors.
anything of value
Perhaps that's what you believe, but - they supervised you. Naturally I don't know any of the details, but a case could well be made that they contributed through you, their supervised junior.
Should that be enough to entitle them to authorship of your papers during your Ph.D.? Perhaps not. But - that's debatable. And many would argue the answer is that it does.
nor would they have been capable of contributing a single word in the first place.
Not only is this effectively impossible to prove, but is also rather slanderous of a claim. People could sue you for saying that - at least in principle.
Bottom line: As far as any adjudicative entity can tell, you might just be lying because you had some sort of a personal quibble with these people; and even if you were to present evidence for the more provable parts of your claim, it would probably not be enough to merit a finding that their authorships should be stricken from those papers.
I'm sorry for the harsh tone, and it's quite possible that you were used for aggrandizement by your supervisors and that they shouldn't have accepted their names being added to those papers, but - this harsh tone is what you'll probably hear when you make your demands.
Motivation
With respect - I question your motivation here. You write that
I have ... emancipated myself from that abusive relationship
but it seems that you have not quite done so. You are still hung up on relationship with these advisors, not focused on moving forward in your academic career - nor even on improving supervisor-supervised power relations in academia in general - but rather on what could be described as personal vindication.
Even if you were to achieve your goal and remove your advisors/supervisors as co-authors, very little would have been gained except possibly emotionally. You will likely not even have affected a change in these people's future treatment of supervised graduate students.
So have you really
Now ... come of age
? I doubt it. This endeavor seems like the misjudgement of someone who has not come of age. You seem to want to expend extensive effort and place yourself at all kinds of risk and adversity - to right a wrong, perhaps, but in a way which will have very little effect other than personal emotional benefit.
You also use rhetoric like "so-called-supervisors" and "unreal authors", which suggests you're rather distraught about this still.
What can you do instead?
You write that:
As a PhD student I was implicitly coerced to include their names as gifts as honorary co-authors or else I would not have received any institutional support (namely residence permit and contracts).
If you can establish this coercion indeed occurs, that is a matter which is much more likely to be effectively actionable.
Consider discussing this with other (current or former) Ph.D. students; faculty members who disapprove of this practice, if you know any; the junior researchers' labor union (if your university has one); the university ombudsman, comptroller or self-inspection body if one exists; and finally, perhaps the press. But - don't focus on your individual supervisors. Instead, make this about the general problem of coercion.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.073011 | 2023-01-16T12:48:49 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/192571",
"authors": [
"A rural reader",
"Buffy",
"David Mulder",
"EarlGrey",
"Father Geppeto",
"Graham",
"Greg Martin",
"Karl",
"NotThatGuy",
"Tripartio",
"Vladimir F Героям слава",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"Zizy Archer",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112402",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11353",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128758",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/134288",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136702",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14273",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43789",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77932",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78796",
"usr1234567"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
126431 | My adviser wants to be the first author
I am working on a paper after finishing my Masters. I did all the lab research and writing of the manuscript. My professor was only involved to guide me throughout the research and read my writing and give his comments.
Can I argue with him and tell him I am not letting the article to be published if he insists on being the first author?
Please specify your field, because author order has different meanings in some of them. For instance, in many areas of research, it's usual to order authors alphabetically.
Are there others involved? What would the whole list of authors look like according to you and him?
First author or joint first author? Since many fields can have papers with large numbers of people with small contributions it's common to highlight the "first authors", ie the people who put the most direct work into the paper. It's not unusual for a student and direct supervisor to be joint first author on a paper they both put many hours into.
@user49915 please post answers into answers, so they can be voted on
It isn't a good career move to counter your advisor in things like this. You need him to sign your thesis (already done) and to write you a good letter of recommendation - maybe still to come. If you anger him, whether rightly or wrongly, it will be you that pays the price.
As I said in a comment, this kind of "authorship" is common, accepted, and perfectly natural in some fields, even if it is a bit stupid.
Having joint authorship with a professor can actually be a help to your career, even if he takes first authorship. Some people will just assume that he did all of the work (no matter the order of authorship), carrying you along. Others will just assume that you did all the work and he is first author by courtesy.
This is something you can't control.
But a publication with your name on it anywhere is a plus for your career.
If you want to fight a system that you think is stupid, wait until you have some power and standing in academia to back you up. Otherwise you get squashed before you have a chance to fly.
Work with him and get a good letter.
I realize this isn't the answer you wanted to read. But think long term, not the short.
It is perhaps common, but it's neither universally accepted nor natural.
Thanks for your reply. Fortunately, I have already graduated, moved on and do not need his letter of recommendation.
Note that signing a thesis is a thing limited to some countries. I never heard of it outside of this site. It’s rather confusing to those who are not in a country where this is done.
@Wrzlprmft That's interesting. I would have assumed that an advisor, supervisor, or examiner needs to, at least figuratively, sign off on a thesis everywhere for the project to be considered completed. Otherwise, how is decided whether the student is done and has passed?
@xLeitix: Sure, the final thesis will be officially reviewed by the supervisor (and somebody else) and the candidate passes or doesn’t, but signing doesn’t play a prominent part in the process. My first thought when hearing about professors signing theses was that it was some kind of ritual after the fact, like an author signing a book.
@Wrzlprmft, presumably they "sign" something. A grade form or an acceptance document.
@Wrzlprmft I think you are reading "signing" too literally. What I think people mean is "my prof does not let me pass before this and that happens".
@Buffy: Sure, but that’s not very prominent. In my case, I never got to see those forms.
The problem with this approach is that, by accepting it, for the majority of people there wouldn't be a long term in Academia at all (because you are thus sponsoring a system based on anything but meritocracy).
@gented, sorry, but I don't understand your comment. Care to expand/explain?
@Buffy My comment was related to the fact that joint authorship for the most part only makes "rich people richer", namely automatically produces tons of publications assigned to people who in some cases didn't contribute much. Since unfortunately the mere number of publication is the main discriminator for an academic position we as community should work in the direction of changing the mechanism, rather than accepting it (but of course this is very naïve).
I agree with snapshots of this reply (do not undertake this with anger, do not try to fight the system). However, the need to help a student appreciate that expressing his or her sense of what is right in an honest, objective manner is the right thing to do seems to have been missed if not entirely subsumed in this reply. The best we should offer is not what seems to amount to "keep your head down, tow the line, and hope someday that maybe you will be the boss".
But think long term, not the short On the other hand, the "long term" for someone who does not want to pursue a career in academia is to realize that he will be listed as second on a paper which may be useful sometime in the future. Instead of being the first one. It may or may not have an impact (not likely) but by agreeing to be the second one it is irreversible.
Can I argue with him and tell him I am not letting the article to be published if he insists on being the first author?
Other answers have already indicated this is potentially a somewhat dangerous move if you plan on continuing with a career in academia.
However, I believe that you can, and perhaps you should. It would be especially useful in such an argument/discussion if you could bring examples of similar cases - with the same advisor or in the same department or subfield - where the advisor was credited last.
On the other hand, I notice you've written:
My professor was only involved to guide me throughout the research and read my writing and give his comments.
And I have to say - "only"? If he was guiding you the whole time and giving you comments all the time, isn't it possible that the research progressed in a way that he envisioned? Perhaps you're misjudging the extent of his contribution. While the work you did seems arduous to you, that's partly because you're new; perhaps for a more experienced researcher, you just did the "grunt work". I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case, but don't go arguing with your advisor unless you can be certain this point of view cannot be defended.
Also, regardless of the above - don't start this discussion with an ultimatum or with a declaration you intend to "bury" the paper.
Finally, another alternative I would suggest, on principle and irrespective of who did how much, is alphabetical order of author names. The practice of listing names by order of decreasing contribution is very problematic and IMHO should be opposed in general. Author names should be listed alphabetically, and if the authors do not explain who did what then people can just ask; or better yet - not ask. Of course, the advisor might theoretically be even more averse to that than to being listed second; it depends.
Thanks for your answer. He provided me with the resources (lab) and offered me to work in that project. However, I did all the experiments needed (without help) and wrote the whole paper based on my thesis. Of course, the research progressed in a way that he envisioned but it was because of my findings. As a student, I did what he wanted me to do but I don't think this disqualifies me from being the first author.
Whether or not alphabetical order of naming is done varies heavily by field. For example, in Computer Science this is almost-never done, whereas in Mathematics it is almost-always done. In lower-tier journals, the editor or institution may have influence, but AFAIK it would just be misinterpreted to do it unconventionally.
@imallett: It does vary by field, but I believe this should change. All paper should have authors listed alphabetically IMO.
@einpoklum The fact that one believes certain things should change doesn't mean they are near desired state now or will be there in 10 years. OP should not be asked to be the martyr for a perceived future good (of course, they can choose to become one). I personally do not so much believe in alphabetical ordering, because it disadvantages people which have no A or Z as first letter of their name. Unfortunately, psychology rules, and the first and last authors are more likely to be popping out from a page (disclosure: I have often been middle author and it didn't harm me, but that was luck).
@imallett Alphabetical ordering is quite common in computer science.
@chepner Gotta have some way of testing all of those sorting algorithms ;)
@user105565, What determines author order (in fields where you don't just go alphabetical) is usually who came up with the novel idea that motivated the experiment. Maybe it was the hypothesis that the experiment was meant to test, or maybe it was a novel way to test a previously-published theory. Who did the most work is not the main consideration. You haven't said enough for us to know which of you should be first author on this basis.
@imallett Not sure what area of computer science you're talking about but, in theoretical CS, alphabetical order is near-universal.
@DavidRicherby: In the field of DB systems (think SIGMOD, VLDB, ICDE, CIDR) papers authors are not listed alphabetically.
@DavidRicherby I would amend my comment to say "Applied Computer Science". Whereas, Theoretical Computer Science is, of course, (more-explicitly) a variety of Mathematics, and naturally follows those rules.¶ Personally, I see merits and disadvantages to both naming paradigms, but the point is it varies by field (even, as we see, by subfield), and randomly breaking conventions because you disagree with them is a good way to confuse people as much as elicit change. (That's not to say doing it anyway is impossible—just, that that's a significant consideration that I feel bears remembering.)
Can I argue with him...
Rather than taking a starting position where you want to get in an argument, a much better approach would be to try to have a mature conversation where you can each agree on what your contribution to the paper was, and what each of you feel is the appropriate criteria for first authorship. Ask your supervisor for his opinions on this matter, and be open-minded and respectful. If you have a different opinion, then let him know your contrary view, and let him know that you are feeling aggrieved.
It is not unreasonable for you to raise authorship concerns with your supervisor. This is a conversation that is a legitimate part of joint research work, so you don't need to repress this. However, like all professional matters, it should be raised in a respectful and professional way. Begin by assuming good faith on the part of your supervisor, and don't start off framing the matter as an "argument" you need to have. Try to figure out where you agree and where you disagree, and just be mindful to make sure you don't allow your frustrations to lead to escalation into an unproductive conversation.
Before raising this matter with your supervisor, it would be a good idea for you to read some material on authorship conventions so that you are able to put your case with some support for outside sources (e.g., see this report). However, you should expect to have a preliminary meeting where your only initial goal is to exchange views on the matter, and then allow each party to go away to consider the views of the other. An initial conversation on this topic might end in disagreement, but if you can support your own view with reputable outside sources, that is likely to be more persuasive than if you cannot.
These kinds of cases really shouldn't arise, since supervisors and students should always discuss authorship expectation before they begin a research project and papers. I think your supervisor probably made a mistake in not discussing this up-front with you before the work on the paper was done. Even if you are unable to resolve this particular disagreement, it would be a good idea to formulate clear expectations on future papers with your supervisor. Inquire into the requirements he would expect for you to be first author on a paper.
I did all the lab research and writing of the manuscript. My professor was only involved to guide me throughout the research and read my writing and give his comments. ...
If that is an accurate description of the contributions (who came up with the research idea?) then it does not sound to me like enough to warrant first authorship on the part of your supervisor. Conventions will vary from field to field, but in my understanding, the first author should generally be the person who did the most work on the paper. (When I have supervised students in research projects they have always been the lead author on the resulting papers, except in one case where I did the majority of the work on the paper and wrote the first draft.) Ethical guidelines on authorship, such as in the linked report, may give some guidance and references discussing authorship-order, so these are worth reviewing.
Please note that there are some reasonable counter-arguments to this view, especially within the scope of research done in a Masters degree. In that context, research work is usually at a low level and the supervisor often has a substantial teaching and supervision role. One might reasonably make an argument for first authorship of the supervisor in this case, but in my view it should depend on the specifics of the contributions on a case by case basis.
Occasionally (and more than occasionally in private / Ivy League institutions), professors will have their names credited as the primary author of a paper that was produced by their graduate advisees. In my view it is unethical, but in the eyes of some academics, it's customary. Some professors view their advisees as underlings to further his or her brand recognition in whichever field he/she works in.
in my view, your advisor is in fact not the author, if it's true that you did the research and literally wrote the paper. Before confronting him about it or giving him an ultimatum, I would go to another professor in your department whom you trust, and have a confidential conversation about the appropriateness of your advisor's demands versus the general attitude of the department. Sometimes you'll find that "nearly everybody does that" and sometimes they'll say "that's unacceptable."
If you consult with other professors and you get the impression that you are in the right, you will have more clout in dealing with the issue if your advisor becomes obstinate and makes a big deal out of it. But beware, all of the professors in your department are probably friends, or even worse they could be extremely factionalized. In either case, you run the risk of this "private" conversation being circulated around the proverbial "teacher's lounge."
Unless you are in an insanely competitive field at a flagship research university, I don't think this is going to blow up in your face. But only you can make the judgement for yourself.
After conversing with a trusted faculty member, I recommend you next present your concerns to your advisor, and see if he is willing to be reasonable about this. If he still isn't, this is a situation where you might need to get the administration involved, but they largely bend to the whims of tenured faculty members who bring in the big bucks with their research.
There should be a discussion here on the benefits versus detractors of submitting to your professor and having your name published second on the paper...versus not having your research published at all. I am a somewhat stubborn person and refuse to let anyone take credit for my work. But this might not be the most expedient approach for a person who is trying to get his/her name on publications under any circumstance. You'll have to decide which one you are, and I hope some other folks chime in on this particular subtopic.
addendum: If you produced your research using a program or model developed by your advisor, or some kind of privileged archival/digital/etc. access through your advisor that you'd otherwise not be able to use, I can see his demand being slightly more legitimized, so consider that as well.
While I respect your opinion here and agree with much of it, note that it isn't really an Ivy League issue. Some fields just expect that advisors and supervisors and such are first author. Fact of life that is hard to counter. Since it is expected in those fields, it seems odd if you do it differently. Use the professor to get your degree and move on with one or more publications.
This is the kind of counterpoint I was looking for. It is probably more expedient to allow the advisor to take credit if the promise of future publication or securing a job is high. There isn't too much consequence if the research is not groundbreaking. However, if OP developed some novel AI model that's going to change the world, I certainly would recommend he press the advisor on authorship.
@Umbrella_Programmer Many advisers are sane and value the contribution of their students, if they make a ground breaking innovation. In the case of a plain execution of a master thesis, I can understand an adviser claiming first authorship.
You should note that "important professor et al." usually brings more attention and citations than "student nobody knows et al.". Thus, I would not fight his decision.
Is his last name ahead of yours in the alphabet? Then you could ask him, whether you can make a footnote "Authors in alphabetical order", after writing him first.
This makes sense -- in some contexts the professor putting their name first could be seen as a form of endorsement, and depending on the professor and the field, that endorsement could be very valuable to your career.
I have faced the same issue several times when I was still studying. I have written three articles and was always in the second position. Of course this may seem "unethical" and not correct, but just take a look at what you have done on the topic so far and what your professor has done so far.
I can only speak for the field of meachnical engineering, but several points to mention in this field are:
Most probably you didn't start from scratch. You based most of your work on previous work of your professor, PhD-candidates and other students
your supervisor guided you through your thesis. Looking back at my thesis, I have to acknowledge that I'd have not been able to make my thesis in 6 months without my supervisor putting lots of effort in it. And also looking back I have to say that many good ideas were brought up by my supervisor and I was just there to "implement" these ideas. Also the "basic" idea on which the whole thesis was laid out was, of course, coming from my supervisor. Honestly: implementing ideas when being guided by a supervisor is the easy part in doing science. Being the one to guide others is the hard part.
your supervisor guided you through the process of writing the paper or even teaching you how to write the paper.
Having a "known name" as the first author always helps.
Of course it felt bad to be the second author in articles when I wrote my thesis, but looking back it seems like the right way. Perspectives change when you are on the other side and you see the "real" workload of being a supervisor. :)
You underestimate the work your adviser did. He choose the topic, he figured out what to prepare (or get prepared) that you can have a topic which fits the requirements of a master thesis regarding amount of work and depth of knowledge.
Eventually you will do a PhD and supervise bachelor or master students yourself. Then you will learn home much work it is to advise a student well and to prepare a topic.
If the adviser is able to figure out a topic leading to a publication, that is superior and ennobles your work. As far as I know engineering, math, physics, computer sciences, and human sciences, most master theses are not worth to be published. These are rare exceptions!
If the OP's description is accurate and they did indeed do the work and write the paper, then the mentoring that you describe would merit co-authorship but not 1st authorship.
There does not appear to be anything in the OP's question that specifies that the supervisor chose the topic, etc. Can you explain where you are getting this information?
@Ben Are you serious? A master student picking his own topic and it gets publishable without massive guidance by the adviser? This is so unlikely or OP must be such a genius, that it should be mentioned in the question. This answer is not only meant for OP but for the bulk of people facing the same problem.
@KennyPeanuts From the question I don't know. If everything was prepared, the student run some repetitive lab tasks, wrote the text along existing papers and did not add any intellectual value, then certainly not. This could be backed by "I did all the lab research and writing of the manuscript."
A master student picking his own topic and it gets publishable without massive guidance by the adviser? — Sure, why not? My master's students have done it. Hell, I know undergrads who've done it.
@JeffE I am in the wrong field. My first paper took me two years as a PhD, that was not bad in my group.
Or maybe you just didn't get lucky.
I would suggest to him that you be the first Author, but he be the corresponding author. In my department, for a tenure package (for example), professors are rewarded equally for first author or corresponding author papers. I don't believe this is that uncommon, and would be a win-win for both of you.
You face three issues.
First, what is the merit to you of being first author versus being co-author on a journal with only two authors? This question is independent of your "feelings" about being first or second. Can you make an objective statement that says your future success in your field of study absolutely depends on you being first rather than second author on this publication?
When you can categorically make a statement that is this strong, you need to make it and do so now. By comparison, when your best statement on this issue is no more than the equivalent of a nebulous understanding that "it gives me more exposure in my field", you should weigh the two other factors more heavily.
Secondly, what is the merit to your advisor of being first author versus being co-author? This is the mirror question to the above. For example, does an upcoming tenure and promotion decision for your advisor depend absolutely on the number of first author papers that he/she has published?
You should at least discover the background for this question. You may claim an injustice is being done to you by your advisor based on the first issue. Yet how far have you gone to appreciate where your advisor stands by mirror comparison?
Finally, what are the rights that each of you bring to the table in order to complete the publication? In your role as the primary worker and documenter for the work (taken at face value as being truly stated), you have a right to negotiate authorship. Your advisor however may be due full acknowledgement due to his/her greater role of having provided all of the ideas behind the research. To what extent did he or she completely initiate the work that you did, proposing all of the approaches that you took and defining all of the analysis that you were to do? Perhaps your advisor does have a greater right to claim first authorship because of his/her greater role in setting, maintaining, and directing the success of the work.
These issues are what you face at a negotiation table. It is not an argument table ... it is a negotiation table. The negotiations should be done up front, hopefully before the publication is started.
In practice, at this point, you should first decide whether your case has strong merits on the three issues above. Regardless of your decision, you should still talk with your advisor to clarify what you understand about them. You should strive to present your case honestly, not argumentatively. You should do so even with the understanding that you may have accept the pre-ordained outcome of being a second author, not a first author. At best, you may make a strong and sufficient objective stand to sway your advisor to appreciate the greater need that you have to be the first author. At worst, you will leave the presentation as a second author but knowing that you will not be carrying an unreconciled resentment about what you could have done but did not do.
Finally, discussing this with your advisor may not be an easy task. You may already face a sense of being held hostage to the power of your advisor to sign away your thesis or your future career. Do not let this fear put you in a place where you believe that you cannot at least assemble and put forward an honest, objective, and balanced case for your views. You may never change your advisor's mind regardless of the strength of your case. When you learn to state your case with no need to win it under situations of authority, you will learn how to do it better the next time at the outset when it may count even more.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.074707 | 2019-03-13T22:18:07 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/126431",
"authors": [
"Ben",
"Buffy",
"Captain Emacs",
"DQdlM",
"David Richerby",
"Federico Poloni",
"JeffE",
"Jeffrey J Weimer",
"John Coleman",
"Kenneth K.",
"Murphy",
"The Photon",
"Umbrella_Programmer",
"WoJ",
"Wrzlprmft",
"aaaaa says reinstate Monica",
"aqua",
"chepner",
"einpoklum",
"gented",
"geometrian",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104737",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/105565",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15387",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15446",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16078",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22628",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/248",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30716",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36339",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58783",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72815",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85366",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9300",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96595",
"user105565",
"usr1234567",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
123370 | Are authors of papers okay with receiving questions from people in industry?
Would authors of a paper be okay with fielding technical questions about the paper (implementation, theory, etc.) from a person in industry?
I see this as a moral grey area because an engineer in industry is in some way profiting off the work of a researcher without necessarily paying them for the time they took to respond to emails, etc. On the other hand, is the researcher responsible for clarifying details about their paper regardless of who they are being contacted by?
Of course, this will vary from person to person and the length of the engagement, but I was just wondering what the general attitude towards this situation is.
Most people are pleased when anybody has found their work useful or interesting! Someone in industry with a professional interest in the paper is much more likely to get a good response than a question that looks like it has come from a crackpot.
WHen they publish their work, I assume they expect people to profit off it. They were paid by whoever sponsored the research, there's no expectation that people who find it interesting will pay them again (unless they want to hire them).
The engineer is paying the researcher through the company which pays taxes to the state which founds the research. That's the whole concept. And publishing a paper is just a necessity of spreading that research. Best would be to put it directly into everyones head. Notice though that this is about retreiving results and not about asking to research. That would be a different story.
@Mayou36: Not all research funds come through the government.
Researcher make money off each by that measure- getting grants is big money and gaining knowledge helps them get some.
Yes. To some sensibilities, including my own, this is the point of academic research (at least in applied STEM areas). We want people to use our work.
My limited experience is that primary authors are often non-responsive, usually because they have graduated and moved on to other things, while the other authors (often professors at universities) usually do reply to questions.
@alephzero I would shorten that to Most people are pleased when anybody has found their work. Period. :)
I certainly don't see anything immoral about asking questions. You may want to mention your affiliation, which will clarify the issue and perhaps also help the author give a more useful response.
The author doesn't have any particular obligation to respond to your questions or anyone else's, but probably will if they are interesting and well thought out. Academics generally would want to encourage anyone who is interested in their work.
If your questions get very involved, to the point where an academic might consider suggesting a collaboration, you may want to consider offering the author a consultant contract.
+1 If you ask to clarify something they said in a paper, then it's perfectly okay. If you ask "How would I apply this technique to my situation", then you should be hiring them as consultants :)
Replace "you may want to mention your affiliation" with "you should always mention your affiliation." Your affiliation helps to show that the intent of the question was serious, even if the actual question turns out to be dumb because you misunderstood something basic.
As someone who does research with close-to-industry applications, I would love more industry involvement and questions.
This is not a moral grey area - asking is totally okay.
In my country (Germany) researchers at public research institutions are even expected to answer. It's called "third mission" (the first two being research and teaching respectively).
Besides this "third mission" I shall pursue (helping to bring their research to industry), I would be pleased to learn how my research would be helpful in practice and would love to help the company. Just explaining some details is no problem at all. If this develops into some severe counselling one could start thinking about payment, but actually, this is often how collaborations between universities and companies start.
Same in the US as well, public schools will have something in their mission statements about economic development and serving the public.
There’s a distinction between asking an author for clarifications on what she/he has done and asking said author to do more work. The former is fine. The latter... well... I wouldn’t assume an author would necessarily do it unless this extra work would be of some benefit - v.g. additional publication - to said author.
I tried it and got positive feedback.
Would authors of a paper be okay with fielding technical questions
about the paper (implementation, theory, etc.) from a person in
industry?
I was asking myself the same question 1,5 years ago. I work also in industry and was interested in some technical details. I asked my boss for a budget and then contacted the authors offering budget if needed.
I did this several times. My experience: If it takes <15-20min to answer your request, they are happy to help for free. Discussing a budget only made sense for them if the effort was 1-2 days effort or more.
Only problem i would see is if you have questions that would take away a few hours of their time, then its too much to do for free, but too less to consider a contract. But i think asking is always fine, if you show that you respect their time.
(All based on my (limited) experience of 3-4 contacts and my own reasoning,...)
In the mentioned situation of "too much time to spend gratis, too little to set up a contract", you might consider whether you expect to ask for more of their time in the future, or could plan to knowing that it's available. It might be worthwhile paying a retainer for some number of future hours of assistance, or writing a more open-ended agreement that would extend beyond that immediate need.
It's fine. You might even learn something. They can share practical knowledge and you can explain some things about the paper or bounce ideas around about things that aren't publishable. Really, it would be good if it happened a lot more than it does, but the two sides are usually so unable to bridge the gap.
Obviously if someone takes a lot of your time, than you should ask for a consulting contract. But this is really rare that you have that much to offer. I would instead view it as a good form of networking. There is a world outside the ivory tower and it can inform your research (and teaching) to know something about applications.
Of course you don't have any obligation to explain the paper if the interaction is tedious or unpleasant. But I would be open to positive interactions. Have ended up inviting a person in for a talk and vice versa. Granted I was doing research that had a fit with industry (and vice versa). But also, I was open to the interaction and enjoyed something outside academia. Business manager was a cool dude too, funny and good taste in wine.
Would authors ... be okay with... questions about the paper... from a person in industry?
Yes, within reason.
By the way - don't forget that readers outside our "clique" sometimes notice things like implicit assumptions, and occasionally even an error (!)
I see this as a moral gray area because an engineer in industry is in some way profiting off the work of a researcher without necessarily paying them for the time they took to respond to emails, etc.
This is actually a good point, but perhaps more on the collective level than on the individual level. Industry bases a whole lot of its for-profit activity on science and tech developed in universities, and employ engineers and technicians trained in universities/colleges - yet they repay academia with very little money (donations + fraction of taxes) and other resources. Of course this changes by country, but it's definitely the case for most of the world's large tech giants.
So, bottom line:
On the collective level, try to get your superiors to donate to the author's institute, in recognition of their contribution to your company's success. You'll very possibly fail, but you can try. Donation can be in the form of money, hardware, or manpower (e.g. someone who would teach an advanced course relating to his/her professional specialty at the company).
If you expect to require significant effort explaining, consider asking your direct superior for budget for a few consultant hours. If you're in the same country as that person consider even inviting him/her to talk about the paper's findings, adapting it to the background of employees of your companies and allowing for a lot of audience questions.
Yes, definitely feel free to inquire.
Others have noted the general value of an inquiring, but there is another aspect.
When someone from industry inquires, it means that you are potentially doing the academic a favour!
@Dirk mentioned the German 'third mission'.
Elsewhere in the world it may not be so formal, but academics are constantly being asked to justify their funding in terms of its 'real world' applicable or economic value.
You help the academic understand how what they do is applied and how that creates economic value.
They might even be able to use that information directly in grant application, or perhaps in less formal situations.
Additionally, as someone in industry you might understand that when you create a product you thrive on feedback from the market. For an academic, you are potentially providing that feedback, helping them understand which areas of their work is relevant and potentially shaping where they wish to spend their time.
Note: The academic is always on the hunt for funding. Take care to not give false signals in regards whether your organisation might provide that.
As a researcher with a strong industry background, I tended to find a disconnect between the actions of my industry (software development and data science) and the research being conducted by the academics.
I would be delighted if an industry practitioner asked for more details of my academic work and certainly would regard it as a mark of prestige. There is no downside I can see to engaging with such a person - providing, of course, they are not expecting you to contribute significant amounts of your time and resources. If this is the case, then the answer above is correct - they need to be paying for a consultant.
Not guaranteed. Depends lots on the person and how much time they have. Quite some authors of papers expect to get paid for any kind of consulting - which is what answering any question outside of work would be for them.
They often have their fair share of questions from students which is their job to answer on work-time. It is not so weird to imagine they would expect compensation helping people (who usually make more than they do) for doing any work for them.
When I taught English at a local university and had them write research papers, I was always trying to steer the students towards looking at professors at our own university!
My goal in part was to connect Published Research with People Who Researched/Wrote This.
There is not some giant up on high handing down Scholarly Sources, but people, often teams of them, some of them graduate students, are the ones creating it. So they TOO can question the research, wish a study had been designed differently, or want to combine information from different fields.
Alas, as Batman almost said,
[Freshmen] are a superstitious and cowardly lot,
so many were not yet ready to cope with this much intellectual responsibility. But a few now and then were, and that was always fun.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.076778 | 2019-01-19T01:49:44 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/123370",
"authors": [
"Ant",
"Barmar",
"Ben Voigt",
"Flyto",
"Mayou36",
"Perl Ancar",
"Phil Miller",
"alephzero",
"do-the-thing-please",
"fgysin",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103396",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15995",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21987",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36430",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52338",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5757",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74657",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80335",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8705",
"user2617804",
"user71659"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
131683 | A life of PhD: is it feasible?
In the next year I will (hopefully successfully) graduate from a PhD programme in pure mathematics. The location is (continental) Western Europe, the topic of the thesis is arithmetic geometry, if it matters. During my PhD experience I have found out the following things
being a pure math PhD student is a relatively stress-free existence for me. I can just waste all my time learning some math and occasionally writing some papers;
the stipend does suck but I am frugal person from a very poor country so I do not care that much (nor do I have a family to feed);
if I could, I would not mind spending what is left of my life in a PhD programme. In particular, I do not feel any intrinsic motivation to try to get a tenure-track position.
The question is: is it feasible for me to keep applying and getting accepted to pure math PhD programmes before I die or decide to retire? To clarify, I don't really think that I will be a problematic student; during my PhD programme, I got 3 publications accepted in reasonable journals (rank A in AustMS ranking) and I think I could maintain a similar rate of work.
Are there any "magic words" I could tell the committee that considers the applicants to improve my chances?
The idea of PhD programmes is that you give back more to the society than a few papers and a low CO2 footprint. Also: What if you don't get into a new program when you're fifty? You think you'll still be thought hireable in industry? Also how to you want to buy a flat and save money for your retirement days?
PhD scholarships and postdocs aren't awarded only on the basis of the likelihood that you will produce a certain amount of work during the PhD, but also on your potential to have a successful career afterwards. Being a permanent student isn't a career, plus you're taking a spot from someone who does want a career.
@phd You might be interested in this related question: https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/108709/93566
@ElizabethHenning +1 if only for "plus you're taking a spot from someone who does want a career." To the OP, even if you somehow managed to convince university after university to admit (and fund) you as a grad student, given the very limited number of slots it's extremely unethical behavior.
@ElizabethHenning Actually, taking seven or eight spots from somebody who does want a career.
I can just waste all my time learning some math As you seem to place no value on mathematics, your time or (more importantly) other people's time and resources, I doubt we can dissuade you from this selfishness. I can only hope that screening committees can spot this too.
You may not have a family to feed now, but maybe your elder parents may need your support in the future. You might also happen to find someone special with whom you would like to build a family with. By sticking to a low stipend, you are preparing for neither case, and maybe you are building a barrier against finding that special one. For the benefit of society (and likely yourself), I'd advise against this plan, unless you come from a wealthy enough family, such that you don't need to worry at all about retiring.
What is it exactly about being a PhD student that you like so much? It's probably better to figure out the answer to that question and then search for jobs with similar benefits.
@StephenG That strikes me as an ungenerous interpretation of OP's humble comment. I think anyone who wants to spend their life as a math PhD student likely places a high value on math, and considers doing math to be a good use of their time.
@Karl I wouldn't say a low CO2 footprint is guaranteed for a PhD student. I suspect mine is pretty higher than the average citizen with all the flights for conferences
@littleO With respect, the OP is the one saying they'll be wasting their life studying maths, not me, not someone else. The OP places a high value on living the life style of a student (!), not on the pursuit of mathematics. That's my reading based on their words. I think I'm being fair.
Never is too late! Follow your favorites and do not waste your life by pursuing something you do not like. Maybe you're talented and engaged in some other field. A consultation session (with a professional one) may work for you.
You look like PhD is the way for you! :) And the magic words for committee are: "I have papers in journals X, Y and I am going to publish in journals X, Y, Z" :-) This was my experience. I prepared myself in all possible areas and this was the only thing they were interested in :-D
What are the different options for a research-focused role? Research Assitant, Research Associate or similar titles are what I know of. How do junior versions of this differ from a PhD student and what about them do not appeal to you?
The currently most upvoted answer makes it clear that the answer doesn't depend on individual factors and preferences but is "no, it's next to impossible".
Holding a PhD in math would usually disqualify you from being admitted into a PhD program in mathematics. Even if it does not do so officially, I'd consider it next to impossible to get scholarships.
That said, being a postdoc in math is not really much different from being a PhD student. However, even being a postdoc forever is not easy. Many funding sources have restrictions on how long ago your PhD may have been - after 5 years you already have fewer options, and continuing long after 10 years will see you face exclusion from many funding sources, as well as a strong social pressure to get a "proper" job (i.e., a faculty position).
"Doesn't it only matter whether the research gets done or not?" -- no, if this is a professor's only concern, they would have structured the project differently (e.g., assigning it to a permanent scientist, or hiring a sub-contractor). Post-doc positions are specifically intended to bridge between recent graduates and permanent positions, and involve a mentorship component.
"being a postdoc in math is not really much different from being a PhD student" -- It is. The teaching load is higher (and it's actual teaching, not just grading/TAing), at least in the places I know of. And usually no one is explicitly expected to mentor you, though sometimes you can still get an informal mentor.
@darijgrinberg In some countries postdocs have no teaching duties, and they get some mentoring, though less than a PhD student.
Okay, I should indeed have specified that i was talking about the US.
@phd do you know any reasons why there is time limitation on the postdoc positions? - I think you don't understand the purpose/use of postdoc in math. It's not a like a research scientist/postdoc in some field that's just meant to assist the professor's research. They're meant to be transitional positions, and are a way of bringing in fresh blood and ideas. But there are permanent positions that are essentially research only, e.g. CNRS.
@phd I get the impression that a lot of it--at least on the biomed side of things--is a naked attempt at gaming "time-to-job" (or, more specifically, time-to-R01) statistics. It's agist nonsense but...that's where we are.
@phd Same reason that you can't just sit at the rank of Major in the military until you retire - you either go up or get out because there's a queue of people behind you who need your job as the next step in their career. If you're not going to take the next step there's big pressure to get you out of the way for someone who will.
@phd "any reasons why there is time limitation on the postdoc positions? " Since it's mean to be a transitional position, people could assume that if you're not out of it within 10 years you may not be the best performer, or the one they want to send money to.
@J... This is the same argument as 'let other people have a career' from other comments. But is it necessarily good? We may live in a career-centric culture, but it's not universal. In some cultures 'career' is a dirty word. If a person is actually better at his/her position and doesn't want to progress, is it better to remove him/her just to let others try? (Esp. given that in our society too often progressing in career means assuming more and more managerial role, which not many people are good at). So, if the OP shares such values, this behaviour wouldn't be perceived as a sin.
@Zeus I wasn't making a value judgement - only an observation. In any case, as you say, managerial roles aren't for everyone. Universities need to keep new blood rolling through so that they can catch the few outstanding candidates for promotion. If that conveyor gets blocked up with people who have demonstrated that they are disinclined to assume such managerial roles then the school necessarily gives up opportunity to find someone who isn't. Resources are finite and, so, status quo.
I want to highlight that in many countries and institutions, there are research scientist jobs where (almost) the only expectations of the job is doing research.
In the U.S. at least, maybe also Canada and Western Europe, in science (math, physics, chemistry, etc.), contrary to legend, graduate school can be a very wonderful, low-stress, idealistic time of life, if one has no partner, no children, no mortgage, no car payments... to worry about, and simple tastes.
On one hand, yes, in some ways grad students are exploited by The System (low pay), but, on the other hand, there is a short-term (5-year!?!) job security, interesting work, and no increase in (student-loan?) debt. And grad students are not terribly experience teachers nor researchers, so there is some kind of quid-pro-quo apart from the low salary.
At my university, it is possible to maintain that lifestyle and employment style by being a "teaching specialist": low pay forever, substantive uncertainty about employment from term to term, but very low stress/responsibilities otherwise. Some people do apparently deliberately choose such a lifestyle. Why not?
But, as @Karl mentions, if nothing else, what about planning for old age? Low pay-ins to pensions (and/or Social Security in the U.S., apart from other complications) will result in low pension payouts later.
Part of the point here is that aiming at "postdoc in perpetuity" almost universally at best would collapse back to "getting paid like a grad student, with no security, no pension". In particular, not getting paid nearly as well as post-docs, in any case.
So it's not that it's impossible to have that lifestyle, but that there are details and complications that would almost surely make you very unhappy later, without any option to go back in time and change things.
(And, yes, I'm sympathetic to your impulse, not being very materialistic myself, etc., but the realities of aging (not to mention having a partner and kids or other dependents, possibly including one's own parents at some point) have long ago burst that bubble for me.)
Also, the stress of constantly applying for new postdoc positions
+1 for "if one has no partner, no children, no mortgage, no car payments... to worry about, and simple tastes."
no children, no mortgage, no car payments, simple tastes, wait aren't those the basic features of being a monk?
@candied_orange, exactly. The monastic concept of academe. :)
Academia: all the benefits of taking holy orders without that pesky vow of celibacy!
Although being 30 or 40+ in a college town might as well qualify you as celibate, since you will probably end up being the "creeper" at most bars you go to
@paul_garrett monks otoh have an interminable position ;-)
There's no point in trying to do repeated Ph.D. programs in the same field when you can easily replicate the lifestyle you want in the normal way. If you don't want to pursue the tenure track, go to a less good institution and get a part-time teaching job. It won't be much money but it will likely be more than you made as a Ph.D. student. Continue your studies and publishing. You can work with folks from other insitutions in order to keep up your intellectual progress.
There is no easier thing than finding a lifestyle that works for a smart, hard(ish) working, highly skilled person who is happy with an extremely low salary in a developed country.
There is nothing special about a Ph.D. program except that it prepares you for better things.
+1 but then of course, without a PhD program, you don't have a mentor who does some occasional mollycoddling. ;-)
I'm not going to answer the explicit question as others have done it pretty well, but I'd like to address the underlying assumption.
being a pure math PhD student is a relatively stress-free existence for me.
But first, let me congratulate you for that! I don't have any data but I'm pretty sure that most PhD students wouldn't describe their PhD experience as stress-free... so good for you!
During my PhD experience I have found out the following things
You have discovered things about yourself during the PhD. You will also discover new things about yourself after the PhD... even if what you do after the PhD is another PhD. What I mean is that you shouldn't be afraid of what happens after the PhD: you feel comfortable in this environment now so it's natural to wish to keep it, but actually it's likely that you will like other environments as well. Actually it looks like what you like is simply academia, so why not give a try to postdoc positions?
A friend of mine used to say that a PhD is like an initiation ritual into "academic adulthood". For many PhD students the end of the PhD is a time for questioning: self-doubt is very common, fear about the future, sometimes even depression. While it's common to go through this stage, it's important to keep in mind that we might not always see things clearly about ourselves, especially at the end of a long-term project like a PhD. In my experience most people realize what they really have learned (including about themselves) during their PhD only after graduating, because it takes a bit of perspective to see the whole picture.
In conclusion my advice is: don't be afraid, be open to opportunities and keep enjoying the science :)
As the others mention, staying in math would be hard, but if you keep jumping to closely related fields, then it should be possible. For instance, you might find a professor in Eletrical engineering or one of the other "mathy" fields who is working on a topic that requires only a little bit of domain-specific knowledge.
I know a few people (less than 5) that have 2 PhDs. I think one of them was applying for a 3rd. They lived in a poorer Eastern European country, so the pay actually wasn't that bad. Furthermore, finding a job in industry would have been difficult due to their advanced skillset. So although getting more than one PhD sounds crazy, it wasn't actually that crazy if you think it through.
In principle, the others are right though... a Postdoc is intended for people who want more academic training in the same field.
EDIT:
There are 2 overarching scenarios that I have seen lead to someone getting more than 1 PhD. We might as well enumerate those:
Vanity. In Germany, when you get a PhD of a certain type, you can call yourself Dr. (e.g. Dr. Foo). If you get 2 PhDs, then your title is Dr. Dr. Foo. And this could technically go on ad nauseam. Once I saw somebody who insisted on being addressed as Prof. Dr. Dr. XXX. In principle, you could be Dr. Dr. Dr. if you really wanted to (although this doesn't seem to be the desire here).
Some countries have very little industrial technical sophistication. So if somebody wants to stay in their country after a PhD, then they are almost forced to either take a mind-numbing job in industry, or try to find something in academia. However, due to the high number of people in a similar situation, jobs for professorships or other paid academic jobs are hard to come by. So in principle, if one is curious enough to explore other disciplines, then getting a PhD in another field is not such a bad option. I would imagine that at some point a professorship would open up to a person with 2+ PhDs, but there is also the question of whether you would want to become a professor. The work of a professor is often quite far removed from pure research. So if you want to only do research, being a professor is not necessarily a good path.
Two PhDs is extremely unusual. I have never heard of anybody with three. The asker is proposing to get eight or nine. Why would anybody want to be an advisor for somebody doing their third, fourth, fith PhD?
Why wouldn't somebody want to advise somebody like that? If they are bringing in a lot of background in other fields, I would have gladly accepted such a person in my group. In fact the hot trend in research lately is crossover work, and such a person would be immensely helpful
Because somebody whose only interest in is getting a never-ending PhDs has shown that all they're interested in is narrowly focusing on one aspect, and probably doesn't have the breadth of big-picture knowledge needed for effective interdisciplinary research. Because, after four years, they'll just say "OK, done with that. Time for something different." and go back to square one instead of moving forwards.
I admit that that is possible, but then that would be reflected in their research
I concur with @DavidRicherby. Doing multiple PhDs (certianly more than two) is a sign only that someone is unsure of where they want to go, only that they like being an academic. It shows a penchant for serial specialism rather than generalism (i.e., big-picture knowledge or highly interdisciplinary work).
There used to be someone in my office who was doing a second PhD but I have never heard of anybody doing a third in my life.
Two PhDs can make sense if on different fields... One of the best imho profs I ever had had two, one medical, and one in computer science... He's been doing neural networks... But yeah these very rare are exceptions, and different field is key... People refer to the institution from which you got your phd as where you come from, in a way it would be like having been born in two different places...
The main problem with doing more than a single PhD, is that usually you won't be admitted to the program when you already have a PhD. The sole exception, as far as I know, is vastly different fields, e.g. Physics and then become a patent attorney and do law, or become interested in some historical feature and do history. Staying in the same field, as the OP wants, is from my experience (also Western Europe) not possible.
It is immoral and anti-social of you to try this. So don't.
You're asking about feasibility, but are ignoring the detrimental effects such an attempt, or practice will have on the academic community and PhD candidates in particular.
Universities and academic staff members invest resources - including time and money - in PhD programs. Young graduates aspiring to train as researchers need those resources. You'll be taking other PhD candidates' positions.
You would be making PhD-level researcher skills available to universities for the price of a PhD salary/stipend. That undercuts us - everybody else - who have expenses and need to support a family, or buy a home (someday...) and so on. You would be hurting us.
You have an obligation to pass on your knowledge to other, younger and less experienced, students and researchers. From your description, it seems you expect not to have to teach nor to advise younger students during your subsequent PhDs. Don't shirk that community responsibility.
I suspect it many not be psychologically beneficial for you to be "stuck" in that place in life, but that's very speculative and I don't have evidence, so I'll just put it out there as a possibility.
@DavidRicherby: I think OP implied s/he won't be teaching. See edit.
I added "during your subsequent PhDs" to highlight the difference between the asker's plan and the plan of somebody who's leaving academia. Roll back if you don't like it, of course.
I don't think OP should be made responsible for the lack of good positions in research and education. It's a policy matter, nothing an individual can do anything about. Should one also feel guilty for taking a six year full-time position, even if six two-year part-time positions could be financed with the same money? We're sitting in one boat, solidarity would be more useful than blame-games.
@henning There is a clear difference between offering to do, e.g., half a job for half the pay (job-share, which is only useful if somebody else only needs half the money) and offering to do the whole job at reduced pay (undercutting other workers and generally driving down wages).
@einpoklum henning was trying to set up some sort of equivalence between job-sharing and your point 2.
@DavidRicherby: Well, still not quite getting it but I will restate my earlier answer. I'll rewrite my earlier comment then.
@henning: If OP drove a low-efficiency gasoline-based car, s/he isn't responsible for the climate crisis, but s/he would be contributing to it. On the micro level - it's quite possible the next place OP applies to get into as a PhD candidate only has one position open at a time in a certain subfield, and s/he will take it while someone else who wants it, doesn't get it. As for 6y full-time vs 6 x 2y part-time - please explain the context in which these two-year part-time positions would be relevant.
You might consider making, for example, a PostDoc in some more or less computer science field. I guess you will be able to find a connection between arithmetic geometry and some kind of theoretical computer science. (I know Emmanuel Haucourt, a bright researcher and a very nice guy who made the connection between topological algebra and computer science)
Then, I do also recommend to not only care about theory, but also a bit about practice (at least, being able to develop some free software research prototype).
I know excellent mathematicians who became computer science professors with a stellar-level software engineering ability (one of them is Roberto Bagnara, the architect of the PPL....)
With such a resume, even if you don't stay in pure academia, you will continue doing a lot of math. Both in industry (think of large corporations like IBM or Google or MicroSoft or SAP) or in applied research institutions (like Fraunofer institutes).
The point is that, at high enough level, computer science is a sort of math. I'm guessing that arithmetic geometry is strongly related to cryptographic techniques. And these have a lot of highly qualified jobs, even in industry. The lifestyle is almost PhD like (but the pay and job stability is better, with of course more pressure).
As others told you, getting a second PhD might worth it only if you want a tenure-track, purely academic (university) career. If you want anything else, the second PhD is a loss of time. But a PostDoc in a different field is very different story. So my suggestion would be to start a PostDoc in Computer Science (in a theoretical field close to your current skills).
NB. Not even wanting some kind of job stability could be consider as dumb behavior (and is hurting you).
PS. I am almost 60 years old and still employed at CEA, in France, and in 1985, when I entered it, the lifestyle was PhD like (I actually started my PhD at university, but defended it while at CEA). But not more today.
It would be a pretty pointless endeavour.
After circa 50% -> 100% of one (1) PhD you should probably have managed to crank up your general study speed and techniques so that you can perform quite a bit faster on your own without distractions like
teaching courses to MSc and BSc student,
dealing with rewriting papers,
finishing your courses,
endlessly nagging on you. To voluntarily head back in for a second or even third one would be a huge waste of your productivity. ( If you're any good, that is. ). The reason people don't quit when they feel they have reached this level where self study would be more efficient is that they are simply a bit scaredy-cat:y of looking like "drop out"s. It's quite natural. Most humans are a bit scared of that.
Once people have finished a PhD, they no longer have to teach or rewrite papers? News to me!
@DavidRicherby : Sure, if they stay in academia.
And the asker does want to stay in academia, as shown by their desire to just spend the rest of their life doing PhDs.
@DavidRicherby We do not know this. All he says is that he did not find it so stressful and painful he could not imagine keeping doing it. Maybe he would prefer other better alternatives if he could think of any. We don't know what his alternatives would be. Maybe he imagines doing PhD to avoid the increased other duties often associated with taking a step into academia, getting some more permanent position entailing more duties than "PhD student" usually does.
If you're suggesting that the asker should leave academia and do something else, your answer should make that much clearer. Because if they do stay in academia, they'll have to teach and they'll have to rewrite papers.
@DavidRicherby: I do not know asker well enough to give them an advice like this. A decision like this needs to come directly from them.
There is someone who works in my office who actually seems to be doing just that. She is doing a second PhD even though she apparently already has one, but I'm not sure if there is some loophole because she obtained the first one in a different country or something like that.
In general, it's not a viable option though. It's like having multiple Bachelor's degrees. Some people do have two Bachelor's degrees, where they somehow re-trained and paid for the second degree in order to change career paths. In the same way, they are likely people who have two PhD's (or equivalent) for some reason related to change of career path or something like that but in general living from one PhD to the next is not going to be possible any more than a person could just perpetually live doing one Bachelor degree after another: at some point funding is just not going to exist as you can't just fund someone to be a perpetual student indefinitely.
I guess the second PhD is self-funded, so not what OP has in mind.
Having two Bachelor's degrees is also a possible outcome of simultaneous double-majoring at (some?) colleges.
It's possible, I have two Bachelor's degrees myself but I did the second time simultaneously whilst working full-time, so I am sure it would be possible to simultaneously do two at the same time depending on the college.
@henning then there's Really no point. Why pay out of your own pocket to let others decide what you should use your time for when you already have "stamp of approval" saying you have learned to decide that stuff independently on your own now.
@mathreadler exactly.
To improve your chances, I would suggest you to move to a country where multiple doctorates (and titles) are seen as a positive. As far as I can tell, this is the case in my country, Austria (and especially in the humanities). I know a few people with two PhDs and also a few people with three. It's also not uncommon to see signs from lawyers or (medical doctors) displaying two PhDs.
And, there is this guy: https://www.nachrichten.at/oberoesterreich/Das-ist-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Doktor-Norbert-Heinel;art4,843952 (article from 2011 in German, professor with 6 PhDs, two more are planned).
Austrians love their titles, but the Austrian Doctorate is often self-funded. Certainly the chances of getting a second funded PhD position are not better than elsewhere.
@henning: Sure, but as I read the question, OP does not specify that they want to be funded by the PhD position (and not by, say, a side job).
Don't enable OP's inappropriate academic and life choices.
@einpoklum: I don't see what's innappropriate about that. As said before, there are people here doing exactly that. For inappropriatness, that's in the eye of the viewer. I, for one, see OP's plans as much more ethical than working for a big company and helping them making profits as most people do.
@user109737: I may write my own answer to explain. But in a nutshell: Those people are 1. preventing others from being PhD candidates, and 2. Are making available post-PhD-trained researches at PhD salaries, undercutting the rest of us. I think it's probably a bad place to be personally and psychologically but that's a minor and speculative point.
@einpoklum: I am respecting your opinion (and I like your answer), I don't completely agree (especially if OP gets his funding from other jobs). Our disagreement is probably due to education seen differently in different countries: Here, university level education (including PhD) is seen as something one does because they are interested in the subject, not something one does because they need it for their career.
@user109737: 1. It's an education but it's also a limited-term position. 2. Regardless of the person's individual motivation - there are social interests, which are no less important in this case. IMO.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.078213 | 2019-06-09T19:44:48 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131683",
"authors": [
"Adriaan",
"Aubreal",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"David K",
"David Richerby",
"Eilia",
"Elizabeth Henning",
"Erwan",
"J...",
"Kai",
"Karl",
"Kimball",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Matt",
"Mefitico",
"Michael Seifert",
"Noah Schweber",
"Noldorin",
"OganM",
"StephenG - Help Ukraine",
"TafT",
"Tom",
"Tomas",
"YYY",
"Zeus",
"bremen_matt",
"cag51",
"candied_orange",
"darij grinberg",
"einpoklum",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109737",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14503",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15375",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15762",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19599",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20760",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21100",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24499",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/29336",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32085",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35514",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39087",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/410",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41511",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42750",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52491",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53936",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67694",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70337",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77539",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80769",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82316",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91053",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/92334",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/93566",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/93620",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"littleO",
"mathreadler",
"ntg",
"paul garrett",
"user109737",
"xuq01"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
78417 | Whose lab is it?
As a follow-up to this question:
Who does a lab belong to? Is the lab the sole property of the PI (lets assume a simple/small lab with a single PI bringing in all the intramural and extramural funding) or is it a joint venture of the PI and the research staff?
Should the PI call the lab "our lab" or "my lab"?
Should researchers (Undergrads, PhD students, Post Docs, Research Fellows) call the lab "our lab", "my lab", or "my supervisor's lab"?
It's the lab of whoever feeds data to the database for the face recognition algorithm of the self aiming laser gun that's installed inside. On a more serious note, this might be different in different countries, cultures or academic sub cultures/faculties.
Just to add to the cultural differences, it also depends who you are talking to at the certain moment. The PI could say my lab or our lab, depending on his culture or how much he wants to stress that it's the PI's lab. But my lab would not sound awkward. For researchers, I think that when someone represents the lab in a meeting/conference/etc our lab is more appropriate. Talking to fellow/equal-level researchers from other labs, my lab would not sound bad (and definitely would not show taking ownership). But this might all be from my culture... I agree with the comment above.
What's the difference in saying my class and my teacher's class?
Do any of the personnel working in a lab "own" it? In the legal sense, probably not: the university owns it. Even if the lab is entirely funded by grants from the PI, legally those grants are still being paid to the university and not directly to the PI. So I think you mean some more informal sense, in which case...some people will say one thing, some another, some will care, others won't even notice the difference. I'm not completely sure this is answerable...
The PI certainly doesn't own the lab- he can't sell it. He can't even take the equipment to another institution without the permission of his institution and the funding agency.
@PeteL.Clark I mention grants, not because of "ownership", but as a way of indicating that the lab only has a single PI and not a bunch of PIs, CIs, and independent researchers.
I voted to close not as opinion-based but as dependending on many factors. It's also unclear what's the specific problem you're trying to address.
TLDR; every member of the lab can call it "my lab" or "our lab". It's all the same.
Just because one says "my lab" doesn't meant that he/she can exercise ownership over it. It is similar to saying "my country" or "my class".
If the question is about rights of property, then it depends on who bestowed the rights and what exactly are those rights.
In the usual case, the management of the institution would give a set amount of rights to the professor to be in charge of a given place. If the professor wishes to form a lab, he/she may do so and appoint an in-charge for the lab. It could a PI or in several cases, the professor him/herself.
If the PI is the professor who erected the lab, then obviously the lab is owned by the professor. If the PI is someone else, the professor could choose over the rights s/he could delegate to the PI. Examples of such rights could be
right to rule over certain/all projects done in the lab
rights over the control of lab property
right to guide the students assigned to the lab
There are also labs which are maintained by a community of members in the institution. Technically, everyone in the lab owns it in such a case, but the place itself belongs to the management of the institution.
As usual, the answer depends on the country.
In my country, all the equipment belongs to the university, even if it was paid out of PI's grants. If a PI moves to another university, the equipment doesn't move.
Thus, if one strictly looks at the property, no one in the lab would have the right to say "my lab" or "our lab", because it's the university's lab.
But of course, no one looks strictly at the property, and what it counts are the people working inside the lab: for them, it's "our lab". Moreover, usually, almost everyone contributes to the grant requests.
When I was a PhD student, in the group where I did my PhD, we had separate lab rooms for each different experiment, which were run by different people: when speaking among us, I'd have said "my lab" to mean the room where I was running my experiment.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.080488 | 2016-10-17T15:47:34 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/78417",
"authors": [
"BioGeo",
"Brian Borchers",
"Cape Code",
"Pete L. Clark",
"StrongBad",
"clueless",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41905",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62976",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"Ébe Isaac"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
80456 | Who should be excluded from reviewing
My question may be a duplicate of: Sound reasons for excluding a reviewer, but it is motivated by What do you do when you are asked to perform an official review for a journal of a manuscript written by your supervisor?. Because there is an obvious conflict of interest between a supervisor and supervisee this answer claims the manuscript never should have been sent to the current student. The issue I see is how is the editor supposed to know if the potential reviewer has a conflict if they are not listed as a reviewer to exclude.
I essentially never list anyone in the excluded reviewer box. I would likely alert the editor if I was asked to review a manuscript from current and past collaborators, supervisors and advisees as well as colleagues in my current and past departments. This becomes a long list of people to include in the excluded reviewer box and it is not clear to me that it is helpful to the editor. Are there standard people that go in the excluded reviewer box?
Well, current supervisor and supervisee have probably the same affiliation, and this should be a hint to the editor, even if the supervisor is not explicitly listed in the excluded reviewer box.
What to do when the field is rather small and many of the potential reviewers are at the same time collaborators of one of the authors?
@LeonidPetrov by giving the list and reasons to the editor, they can make an informed decision rather than randomly trying people until they find someone with an "acceptable" conflict.
You don't have to do the job of the editor and list every possible collaborator with whom you'd have a conflict of interest. If these people are asked to do the review, they should be the one to warn the editor. You can list people that you think wouldn't be obvious, but again you are under no obligation to do this.
As the first question you link to alludes, excluding reviewers is mostly because you think they'd be unfairly biased against your work.
I always understood that you propose the reviewers according to the instructions and when there is no conflict of interest, e.g. avoiding friends, current or very recent collaborators, your supervisor, etc. You propose who you think would be a good reviewer and unbiased towards your work, like a researcher more or less well-known in his field.
Then you propose to exclude reviewers that you think would be exceptionally biased against you, e.g. people you are in bad terms with, competitors etc.
I believe it is the job of the editor to make sure that there is no conflict with the reviewers proposed (or the reviewers he can find in his list from the journal) and of the reviewer to notify the editor that there is a conflict of interest and thus he/she is unable to do the review.
Meaning that the exclude list is not (to my understanding) a list of potential reviewers that they might be positively biased towards you, but a list of potential reviewers who (you think) would be biased against you.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.080874 | 2016-11-25T17:09:15 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/80456",
"authors": [
"Leonid Petrov",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"StrongBad",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7285",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
11812 | The GRE: Why does this still exist?
I did my undergraduate degree in the US and am heading to graduate school here in less than a month, so I myself have taken the Graduate Record Examinations (the general as well as two subjects tests) and I guess it always just seemed as a sort of un-avoidable formality that nothing could be done about, and so I just took it and got it over with.
In the intervening year between undergrad and the start of my Ph.D. work, however, I traveled overseas to Cambridge where I found that I was quite mistaken: the GRE is very, very avoidable. The solution is simple: don't apply to universities in the US.
By the time I had arrived there, I had already gotten it over with myself, but for most of my peers there, this was not the case, and quite a few of them had simply decided to not even bother applying to the US because of the inconvenience that comes along with that in the form of the GRE.
This made me wonder: are admissions committees at US universities aware of the number of highly qualified candidates they miss out on because of the GRE?
I could understand being willing to miss out on the potential recruitment of these students if the GRE were a significant part of one's application, but I have yet to find any US professor tell me that the GRE scores are weighted highly when it comes to making admissions decisions (perhaps I just haven't asked around enough?). In fact, I've often been told it's the least important factor when deciding whether someone should be admitted. (Indeed, my impression is that the general GRE is more or less a joke and only serves as a convenient way of tossing out applicants who would have been found un-qualified for other reasons.)
Putting aside for a moment the issue of those who decide not to apply to US universities, let's consider the inconvenience faced by those who do. Once again, if you're from the US, I can imagine simply not being aware of this (I know I wasn't), but I now know of several people who have had to fly (sometimes the flights have even been inter-continental!) in order to sit to take a GRE test. And even for those who don't (like probably most of us in the US), there is the ridiculous price: almost $200 for the general and an extra $150 per subject test. I was under the impression that admissions committees encourage people from all backgrounds to apply, rich or poor, but how can they honestly expect this to happen if even those who don't have to fly have to shell out anywhere from $300-$500 in addition to the application fee? (I personally find it a bit nuts that these tests cost several times more than the application itself.)
So, could somebody please explain to me why we still require students to take these things? Do they really add information about the applicant and their abilities that could not be found out any other way?
Now that I think about it, perhaps a more appropriate sub-title would have been: "Why did this ever exist?" =P
There is also the situation where one has to wonder whether to shell out an extra $180 to squeeze a couple extra percentile from the first time. I loathe giving the ETS more money for a test that predicts success in graduate school by only testing the ability to do elementary calculus quickly.
The solution is simple: don't apply to universities in the US. — Or apply to departments in the US, like mine, that don't require GRE scores.
@JeffE That is a reasonable suggestion. However, I imagine for many applicants from the US, the problems mentioned above for the GRE is an annoyance, not a big problem. Limiting oneself to schools in a foreign country or schools that don't require the GRE is a bigger price than just shelling out the ~$400-500 total, considering the cost of an undergraduate education. (I don't know about other fields, but like paul garrett mentions, in math, the higher you go up the ladder of graduate schools, the more likely GRE scores are required.)
@JonathanGleason The most probable answer to that question is likely "Someone thought it was a good idea at the time"
Computer Science seems to be the opposite of math in that respect (despite the relative difficulty of the CS subject GRE).
@JeffE, this may not be your department's decision, this may be a university-wide Graduate School policy.
The GRE "only serves as a convenient way of tossing out applicants who would have been found un-qualified for other reasons": That may be. But well-known departments get lots of applications, and the admissions committee is made up of faculty who are very busy already. So it's understandable that they'd grasp at a quick way to weed out the least qualified applicants. I'm not necessarily defending the GRE, but perhaps you can see why departments might use it.
@StasK: In fact, it was a departmental decision. Other departments on my campus, like math, do require GRE scores.
GRE still exists because someone is making profit out of it.
From The Atlantic: The Problem With the GRE
Empirical evidence on the relationship between GRE scores and post-graduate performance
There is a massive meta-analysis by Kuncel et al (2001) that empirically evaluates the correlations between various aspects of the GRE with multiple post-graduate performance criteria.
Based on hundreds of studies and thousands of participants, GRE shows reasonable correlations with post-graduate GPA (i.e., around observed r = .21 to r=.43). Similar correlations emerged between GRE and faculty ratings of the student.
Correlations of GRE with research productivity and publication citation counts were smaller, but still positive. This is not surprising given that these are more distal outcomes and there are many non-academic reasons why people may or may not pursue an academic career or have publishable results.
The authors thus concluded that GRE was a valid predictor of a wide range of graduate outcomes. They also noted that "subject tests tended to be better predictors than the verbal, quantitative, and analytical tests."
In general, selection decisions are assisted by standardisation, and a big part of academic achievement involves measuring baseline ability. Thus, the GRE combines both standardisation and competence measurement.
Update 2023:
A new meta-analysis was published by Feldon et al (2023) that reviews GRE correlates with academic outcomes. They report correlations between GRE and GPA of .24 (total), .20 (verbal), .17 (quantitative), and .21 (analytical).
Response to comments
There have been a few points made in other answers and in comments, which I'll comment on here:
Conflict of interest: @msw wrote that they "consider the cited paper to be junk because ETS provided all available data". In general, I don't find the results in the meta-analysis surprising. Most tests like the GRE tend to have fairly strong correlations with general cognitive ability. It is well established through thousands of independent studies that IQ scores correlate fairly well with both school grades and job performance (i.e., in the r=.50 range; see Neisser et al 1996 for a field consensus review). The results show correlations less than .50, but that's not surprising given some of the issues around standardisation, practice, range restriction, domain specificity and so on.
Belief there is no correlation based on personal observation: Note that if the correlation is around .20, that means that 4% of variance has been explained. That leaves a huge amount of variance in performance to still be explained. It would not be surprising to meet many people that did well on GRE and poor in graduate school or vice versa. Thus, it is problematic to rely on personal experience when it comes to evaluating the validity of tests where such correlations are likely to be only modest.
Small correlations are useful: While a .20 correlation is small, it can still help make selection decisions. In particular, when evaluating the suitability of selection tools, you need to contrast the validity of a given tool with other available tools (e.g., interviews, GPA, references, and so on). I'm not as familiar with results in the graduate selection domain, but certainly in the employee selection domain, which is quite analogous, cognitive ability tests tend to correlate more highly than interviews, references and so on (for a comprehensive meta analysis of employee selection, see Schmidt and Hunter, 1998). That said, the best selection decisions are typically obtained by integrating multiple selection tools. Furthermore, the small correlation also should highlight to individuals who score poorly on the GRE that it is not that predictive, and therefore it shouldn't discourage an individual from pursing post-graduate study.
Does training invalidate the GRE?: @user8134 wrote "many people significantly improve their GRE scores by taking courses with prepping companies like Kaplan. So it seems GRE test does not measure any intrinsic ability/talent necessary for grad. school." I agree that individual differences in training and preparation for the GRE may influence test scores. That said, if you characterise test scores to be determined by true ability, training, and error variance, then I would expect that true ability would remain the much larger source of explanation in test scores. This is based on general observations about testing for ability based assessment. In general, the degree to which training is an issue would depend on how much the test materials teach to the specific test. Overall, I would assume that this would reduce the potential validity of GRE, but that the GRE would still be useful. Furthermore, training and nuisance factors can be used to do better on many selection instruments. For example, people can be coached on how to frame their CV or how to answer questions in interviews. Such training is potentially a source of error variance, but it doesn't invalidate CVs and interviews completely.
Why would anyone care about post-graduate GPA? (@JeffE) @JeffE further notes " in PhD programs, the only thing that really matters is the student's research output.". Some post-graduate courses include meaningful graded coursework and others don't. For the courses that do include meaningful coursework, then such coursework provides a more standardised way of measuring post-graduate performance. So the validity of GRE in predicting such outcomes is not surprising. And thus, presumably we could generalise this to being indicative of how people perform in less standardised aspects of post-graduate performance. Of course, there's an inferential leap here, but in general, performance in related domains tend to correlate (e.g., coursework in mathematics with research performance in mathematics); it's not perfect, but it's still a positive correlation. Furthermore, if the validation study includes some post-graduate coursework where everyone gets top marks and such data is mixed with studies where grades are valid measures of performance, this would only serve to attenuate the observed correlation. Thus, this would suggest that the correlation between GRE and post-graduate GPA is higher than reported by the meta-analysis. Also, the meta-analysis does report correlations with research output and they are weaker but still positive. It also reports correlations with supervisor ratings.
Better alternatives to GRE: None of my comments above are necessarily advocating the use of the GRE. Developing an effective selection and recruitment system whether it be for employment or post-graduate admission is a complex task. That said, most post-graduate selection systems would want to get a reliable and valid measure of academic aptitude. GRE, IQ tests, other ability tests, undergraduate GPA, all have reasonably validity evidence. And in general standardisation and efficiency are important. So, for example, administering your own selection tools takes more time, whereas taking pre-existing measures like GPA and GRE is more efficient.
Ethics of requiring applicants pay money to complete GRE: Several people are critical of the GRE on the basis that it costs several hundred dollars to complete. I think that this is a perfectly legitimate question, but that the question of predictive validity can be answered separately. Such a fee could potentially discriminate against low income applicants. That said, presumably the fee in comparison to forgone wages associated with completing a post-graduate degree is fairly small.
References
Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the graduate record examinations: implications for graduate student selection and performance. Psychological bulletin, 127(1), 162. PDF
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard Jr, T. J., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., ... & Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American psychologist, 51(2), 77. PDF
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological bulletin, 124(2), 262. PDF
David F. Feldon, Kaylee Litson, Brinleigh Cahoon, Zhang Feng, Andrew Walker & Colby Tofel-Grehl (2023) The Predictive Validity of the GRE Across Graduate Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of Trends Over Time, The Journal of Higher Education, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2023.2187177
Why would anyone care about "post-graduate GPA"?
In my grad program, the correlation with post-graduate GPA would have necessarily been zero.
@JeffE In post-graduate courses that include course work then post-graduate GPA would be indicative of a student who is understanding well the material in the course. Of course, it wouldn't come close to capturing everything that is important, but then again it would be hard to craft any single variable that reliably measured everything that a post-graduate course aims to develop.
Indeed, after my first year of grad school, I remember talking with my father about this. He was shocked. "You mean you get an A just for attendance?!" I stopped to ponder how many of my friends reliably attended their classes. "Well, actually, ..."
In the post-graduate subjects that I am familiar with, grades appear no less valid in discriminating between students than undergraduate subjects. That said, it makes sense that the degree to which grades are valid would vary across post-graduate programs, universities, and so on.
Do you actually get grades from courses taken during PhD? For us, it pass or fail, i.e. no grades and thus no GPA...
@posdef I assumed (perhaps incorrectly, I'm based in Australia, where we don't really use GRE) the GRE is used for admission into a wide range of post-graduate programs. I agree some PhD programs have none or only a small amount of graded coursework.
I consider the cited paper to be junk because "ETS provided all available data on GRE validity to us in unaggregated
form." and the notoriously closed ETS doesn't give data often. The second author's long-time commercial affiliations further darken this paper's intellectual independence.
post-graduate GPA would be indicative of a student who is understanding well the material in the course. — So what? At least in PhD programs, the only thing that really matters is the student's research output. If you do good research, you obviously understand the material. And if you don't do good research, then it doesn't matter whether you understand the material.
@JeromyAnglim BTW: And do you have correlations of e.g. number of prior publications of applicant vs performance metrics? .2 seems to be very low (and given that it reduces number of applicants (and there are other metrics), it may effectively select worse PhD students).
No doubt there is going to be some correlation between GRE scores and success in graduate school (just like there will be some correlation between success in graduate school and timed arithmetic tests). The question is if it's worth the price. It isn't possible to implement this, but one way to test would be if the students took the tests for free, and the graduate schools had to pay in order to see the scores (without just increasing the application fee, and suppose they could decide whether to pay after reading the rest of the application).
There is a restriction of range here (the correlation was done only on successful applicants), so the true correlation is likely higher. In theory, even NO correlation between GRE scores of successful applicants and some measure of their academic success doesn't mean that GRE is a bad selection tool, because we didn't look at the outcomes of the nonselected applicants.
That being said, I'd love to see some data on how foreign applicants fare relative to domestic ones. I, for one, had never taken a test at a computer before the GRE experience. I'd bet that the distribution is shifted.
Has there been a comparison of this correlation to the correlation between post-grad performance and other simpler predictors?
And thus, presumably we could generalise this to being indicative of how people perform in less standardised aspects — "Presumably"? You're presenting a statistical meta-analysis; you don't get to presume. (And my objection has nothing to do with whether graduate courses have meaningful grades, or everyone gets an A. Rather, my objection is the reason many graduate courses only give out As.)
Note that this may just be an example of self-fulfilling prophecy. You can probably make (m)any a measurement correlate with a-posteriori quality by convincing everybody to select based on that measurement. Better schools pick those with better values and, on average, produce better output -- surprise.
Even if GRE is a good predictor of academic performance, that wouldn't answer why admission committees effectively restrict the pool of suitable candidates by requiring a prohibitively burdensome test - or more precisely it would imply that they strike an odd balance.
why IQ though? see NNT aka Nero, Dweck and salman khan
So, here's a big problem with that latest study: you're looking at outcomes for people admitted to graduate school. That is an entirely different question from asking about the original population, because those are the candidates who were admitted to graduate school. Admissions may be a bit of a dice roll, but it's unlikely that many candidates who apply successfully to graduate school and then struggle will struggle because of something predictable on their GRE. You don't have included in the study the applicants who were not admitted because their GRE scores were poor.
And they use graduate GPA as an outcome! Who cares about GPA for PhD students?
@Bryan There seems to be a bit of critical discussion of the latest meta-analysis. I haven't done a deep dive, but at least they provide their data on the osf to inform that critical evaluation https://osf.io/awu7c/ . Regarding your point about only sampling successful applicants. This would generally be thought of in terms of range restriction (i.e., a process which would typically attenuate observed correlations between GRE and outcomes).
@JeromyAnglim It's not even just a typical range restriction, it's that the sample is filtered. Someone with a relatively poor GRE who is nonetheless admitted to graduate school probably had other things on their application that looked good, for example.
This is a good question. I have not been a fan of the GRE for 20+ years, although (through whatever luck I had a good-enough number on it myself that it didn't harm me...) many are. Having been on admissions committees and very much involved with graduate programs for 30+ years, I've had ample opportunity to see the (non-) correlation of success in graduate mathematics with GRE subject-test scores. (The other parts are often useful as tests of English fluency, mainly.)
Of course, the world would be a simpler place if GRE subject-test scores really could show talent for higher mathematics. We note that the Educational Testing Service (in NJ, that makes the GRE and other stuff) is a for-profit that has a vested interest in maintaining its products' apparent importance.
The cost is unfortunate, and certainly discriminates against people whose currency doesn't compete well with USD.
The vaguely useful bit of information provided by GRE is that, well, yes, it is the only thing that most applicants will have done, thus, if one insists on "simple comparisons", it is the only thing that allows that. It is clear that comparison of GPAs is even more pointless.
I have known admissions committees that simply ranked applicants by GRE subject test score. There! Done! :)
No, I do not care very much about GRE numbers, but in a way I am glad that some admissions committees do, in a fashion to the way that under-valued stocks are good investment values.
I do think that the elite graduate programs use GRE subject test as a convenient filter, because it selects somewhat for "quickness/cleverness", and they can afford to "lose" some prospects, because they have so many who are "quick/clever".
In the U.S., having a GRE subject test score is also a sign of awareness that people expect you to take it. Thus, it doesn't matter so much what one's score is, but that one _is_aware_ ... even if it is only of "expectations".
But, in summary, no, I see no point in it. But there are economic incentives for ETS to keep making money. And a great number of admissions committees in math have personal predilections that lead them to be fond of (over-) simple numerical quantification, so... there-we-are.
Edit: As @msw observes in a comment, indeed, if GRE measured significant academic achievement cumulative over several years... it would be odd that one could usefully do the "prep" courses ETS provides. :)
Yes, performance on GRE probably is a good indicator of how well a kid can do on a multi-hour, timed, multiple-choice test, etc. Yes, if we make subsequent coursework resemble this (!?) then we give the GRE predictive power. No, I do not recommend making everything multiple-choice! But, amazingly, some people do believe that this could be done, and purportedly save us all a lot of work.
Sure, these things measure something, and produce numbers that can be manipulated. There are people who are inexorably drawn to the possibility of making final decisions in those terms, even when the significance of the numbers is unclear. Meanwhile, reading letters of recommendation and personal statements is obviously not easily quantifiable. Of course!
If it were really the case that "standardized testing" could tell what its promoters like to insinuate, it would be convenient, indeed. But, again, some decades of experience indicate that these tests do not indicate whether or not people can sustain interest over 4+ years, work hard for 4+ years, continue to develop scientific sensibility, and so on. And the latter issues prove to be vastly more important for completion of a PhD. In direct observation of about 700+ grad students, I'd estimate that fewer than 20 dropped out or failed due to lack of intellectual capacity or lack of prior knowledge. Rather, loss of interest in the subject, or personal issues (mental/physical health) dominate. This "sample" of mine includes a very wide range of GRE scores and even GPA.
More anecdotally, several specific examples stick in my mind, of very low percentile on GRE subject test (bottom 10 percent or smaller...) but exceptional achievement in coursework, prelims, and thesis work. These peoples' potential was easily visible in letters of recommendation and personal statement.
More bluntly, it's a self-perpetuating racket by ETS who makes a bloody fortune on useless testing and selling "preparation materials" to train the subjects of their supposedly valid testing methods. Deductive logic test: if the GRE is a measure of inherent qualities, then preparation should not significantly affect a subject's score. Ⓐ True Ⓑ False Ⓒ Either way, ETS makes more money.
If it matters, I did just fine on my GRE with no preparation, tyvm.
You say the GRE is a very poor indicator of completion of graduate programs, which I will believe. But how bad of an indicator is it of the ability to become a prominent researcher? Maximizing the probability of completion in your program may or may not maximize the probability of high levels of success. Giving an example from undergraduate admissions: you have two math major applicants, one has a 600 SAT math and the other has a 760. The first has a 3.6 GPA in high school and the second has a 3.0. The first one has a higher probability of graduation, but the second one might be a star.
@anon, Oh, yes, indeed, might be. Or not. SAT scores certainly indicate even less than GRE subject test. All these multiple-choice tests do substantially test test-taking ability, speed, and especially the math parts are very speed-puzzle-oriented. It's not a bad thing to be quick, to have the capacity to be undeterred by puzzles and tricks, but that capacity itself is not much related to serious mathematics, from my perspective.
@paulgarrett, I would like to say that I agree that the GRE shouldn't be very significant. But you also have to realize that at some schools duds (at the research level!) can get through an entire undergraduate curriculum with high grades. No other current method could faithfully eliminate these people.
@anon, believe me, I know what can happen. High grades in the usual curriculum, which itself is somewhat antithetical to genuine mathematics, do not move me particularly either. The standard undergrad courses based on standard texts are quite often ghastly. Thus, e.g., students who are attracted to that raise suspicion in my mind that they'll not like genuine mathematics so much.
When I was on my department's graduate admissions committee, I found GRE scores to be somewhat useful in the case of students from obscure (often foreign) schools where we didn't know the standards well enough to extract useful information from the grades and where the letters of recommendation all look (to westerners like me) isomorphic.
In my department, GRE scores are used mostly as calibration for students who have good grades but are from universities/programs that we are not familiar with and whose quality we are therefore not sure about. For students with good credentials from strong programs the GRE is pretty much irrelevant.
So, GRE shouldn't be compulsory for all schools but only for those schools which are unknown.
@user774025: I'm sure a policy like that would violate all sorts of equal opportunity rules. Requiring GRE only for those from unknown schools is effectively putting up an economic barrier to students from those schools.
I suspect that many schools which list the GRE as compulsory are willing to take applications without it ... write to the admissions office with this question.
Moreover, @user774025 suggestion would not help calibrate judgements on students from unknown schools with those from known schools.
A couple of issues:
Re Mr. Anglim's comment, a suspect issue re. any correlation between GRE scores and success in grad. school is that many people significantly improve their GRE scores by taking courses with prepping companies like Kaplan. So it seems GRE test does not measure any intrinsic ability/talent necessary for grad. school.
Another issue is that the GRE is a form of forced labor: ETS uses one of the sections in the exam (just which section is unknown to the test-taker) as data for future exams, i.e., the section is not counted for the score of the test. So one is expected , basically, to work for ETS for free, producing high-quality data they would have to pay a lot for, or may not be able to produce themselves. GRE also puts out books to prepare for the exams, which cost above $20 each.
Now, ETS could find a way around this by asking, say, "There may be a section in this test which we use as data for future exams: if there is one, would you be willing to take it, or do you prefer to skip it?". This - asking you to work for them for free - is unethical, IMO, if not illegal. And ETS' BS response to this (I called them) is to tell you: "Well, if you disagree, don't take the test." The problem is some programs require you to take it in order to apply for their grad. programs; ETS is the Frank Burns of testing.
They also demand of you that you will say nothing about what was on the test afterwards, which IMHO is even worse.
Interesting answer. I was not aware about ETS using part of the exam for data. Could I trouble you to add a relevant link about this? Thanks. Also, I like the Frank Burns metaphor too, but which aspect of Frank are you specifically alluding to here? Or are using him generically as a well known (in American popular culture) scuzzball?
One could use "Montgomery Burns" instead, and I think the metaphor holds just as well.
@Jonathan, if you were to ever come to the other side, you will see a great number of glowing applications from top students of the top university in Bolivia or Madagascar. How do they fare compared to the top student of the top university of Idaho? Or a top student from a mediocre university in Massachusetts? If you admit grad students planning to use them as TAs, how do you know that this student from Nepal will be understood by your students in Tennessee, who heartily laugh at both New York and Californian accents?
The GRE fills the role of such a filter, and as such is the cheapest, easiest to use tool available to graduate schools in the US. If you can get any UNESCO money to design and implement a version of it that would be free to international applicants, maybe you can get a Nobels fredspris for your efforts. (This is not such an unrealistic idea as it sounds: an alternative, freely available operating system known as Linux has been developed by enthusiasts, and in many dimensions has replaced UNIX.)
My department's strategy for applicants from unknown schools (either foreign or domestic) is to admit one student with an apparently glowing record and then watch how well they do. After that, we have some basis for calibrating their grades and letters. Sadly, often the result is that we no longer consider applicants from that school, but sometimes it's the opposite. As for the accent, we use the TOEFL to judge English fluency, despite its similar problems.
Also, I grew up just south of Nashville; I've never heard anyone laugh at either New York or California accents.
@JeffE After that, we have some basis for calibrating their grades and letters. Your department is using person A's performance to figure out person B's potential.
@scaahu: Yes, that's right. We're using the performance of student A from school X to judge the potential of student B from school X (along with B's statement, letters, and grades, of course).
@scaahu: in statistics terms, JeffE (and MANY, MANY other departments) try to gauge the conditional distribution of student B's ability given what they know about the grade distribution of the home university Z common to both students A and B, and basically are applying Bayes theorem to gauge the probability of student B's success in the program. (Bayes theorem underlies most of the data-driven decision making, from spam detection to terrorist identification in the airports.)
What you described is a problem, but I don't think GRE is the solution to that problem. Because GRE doesn't test anything related to research capability.
In a word, standardization.
I once asked this question to a colleague, and I appreciated the response I received.
Essentially, the faculty member told me, "What I like about the GRE is that it's the only way I can compare apples to apples."
He went on to explain, "How can I compare a 3.2 GPA at University X with a 3.7 GPA at University Y? I can't. But, at least with GRE scores, I can compare the two students on an even playing field."
My retort was that a high GRE score isn't necessarily a good indicator of potential in graduate school, although it might be a good indicator to determine the amount of time a prospective student spent preparing for the test. (I got a lot of milage out of my How to Ace the GRE practice book.)
He readily agreed, and assured me that it's just one piece of the puzzle. An admissions office only has so much to go on: a transcript, a GRE score, and perhaps a "Why I want to go to graduate school" cover letter.
We could throw out the GRE, but then there would be that much less information to base admissions decisions on.
My gut tells me that the negatives include the expense and hassle for the applicant, and a limited ability to predict how the student will actually perform. But I must admit my colleague had a point with his "apples to apples" perspective.
I can compare the two students on an even playing field — Except, of course, that you can't, especially for international students. At least in my experience, baseline performance on the GRE (and other standardized tests) varies significantly from country to country (and from social class to social class) because of the relative availability and expense of test-training.
@JeffE: You and I agree on that point, although I will say that, insofar as "expense" goes, I only invested $20 or so at Barnes and Noble, and that did the trick. It's possible for most folks to give themselves a pretty good prep experience on a relatively low budget, provided they're willing to invest the time.
Explains the quality of our PhDs, doesn't it. I have personally found the American education system far more wrapped up in silly and actually dangerous formalities than schools in Europe, generally speaking. I was surprised to find this out first hand because the common consensus is that Europe suffers from a great deal of pointless formality that the US does not. The problem is that it's a category mistake: elaborate bureaucratic formalities: yes; greater social formality: sometimes, depends; educational formality, not necessarily. Also, there is a difference between formality and rigidity. While titles are more important in Europe when addressing one another, they actually can enforce a very healthy relationship between the student and the professor which enables a healthy flexibility and informality to emerge. The casual "buddy" culture of the US is actually too chummy which encourages disrespect and I think the reaction to it is a certain kind of seething rigidity that manifests in the student-professor relationship which is unhealthy and domineering many times. But I digress. When I experienced American education first hand, it seemed infantile in its execution and the GREs belong to this set of things which contribute to the culture of pettiness (other things include the "publish or perish" doctrine which has resulted in the explosion of BS and CV padding nonsense and the "career academic" (hopefully that translates into English properly). While there are entrance exams in Europe, graduate school acceptance is according to other criteria. It's not always optimal, but certainly less irritating than this test taking nonsense.
Btw, I find the correlations mentioned above to be exactly the problem. They make the same mistake of drawing rigid and often erroneous inferences from a very poor selection of data.
I find that university education everywhere have been ruined by the pressure to put everyone through it. What you have are glorified trade schools in most cases with millions of applicants pushing through as if through a military entrance exam where narrow indicators sacrifice complexity for measures of simple routine. It's highly corporate and prone to the rat race. Graduate school should be the last place where this kind of pettiness manifests, and yet...
Summary: GREs are a result of the culture, of modern (American) university culture like the silly innovations of the German university which sought to label and shelve every person for particular slots in the machine of the the Reich.
-1: Godwin's Law.
@NateEldredge Heh! Good point, but, nevertheless, this answer does make some good points about culture-centric deconstruction.
Flagged. There might be some good points here, but I can't see them through the rant.
Upvoted. Personally, I enjoy a good rant, and there is much to rant about wrt university systems. Robert forgot to mention that PhD was a German invention (originating at Humboldt University of Berlin) and spread like a disease across the world. Researchers got along just fine before it. The point about US universities becoming a mass system is also well taken.
Good answer. The Nazi comparison is a little unnecessary, but you make some very good points.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.081247 | 2013-08-11T23:46:54 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11812",
"authors": [
"Ana",
"Andreas Blass",
"Anonymous",
"BCLC",
"Bryan Krause",
"DCT",
"Faheem Mitha",
"J.R.",
"JeffE",
"Jeromy Anglim",
"Jonathan Gleason",
"Matchete",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Nobody",
"Ooker",
"Peter Shor ",
"Piotr Migdal",
"Raphael",
"Santanu Sahoo",
"Shadur-don't-feed-the-AI",
"StasK",
"Time4Tea",
"Wakem",
"Willie Wong",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1419",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/285",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30639",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/322",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/415",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4550",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5593",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5622",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5674",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6110",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71315",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/780",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8144",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8201",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/86",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97136",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"innisfree",
"kaptan",
"msw",
"paul garrett",
"posdef",
"user",
"user774025"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
35122 | Is it wise to develop skills that do not immediately benefit short-term research productivity?
I have a master in physics and philosophy and have a keen interest in mathematics. Currently I am doing a PhD in philosophy. On a personal level, however, I cherish the interdisciplinary ideal of combining mathematics, physics and philosophy. I am well aware that realizing this ideal requires an enormous amount of work and talent – and that very likely I cannot 'completely' realize it.
On a structural level, I suppose this is an unfortunate side-effect of the level of specialization in academia today. On a subjective level, however, I feel the need to “revolt” against such over-specialization. It a shame that some "philosophers of science" in my branch haven't solved one differential equation in their life; yet they intend to reflect on what physicists do. I am convinced that combining different disciplines is a worthy thing to do. I suspect many people would agree with me, but the competitive reality of academia makes it very hard to realize.
The time one invests in a secondary area of interest (i.e. mathematics, physics) takes away time to do research in one's main area (i.e. philosophy). The reduced time would (on the short-term) make me less productive and successful. However, in the long-term, it might allow me to produce work of more value and depth.
(1) Is it wise for a PhD student, somewhere below on the academic ladder, to gamble already on long-term investments, or should one give in to the short-term safety and (over)specialize in one area?
(2) Is there some middle-way between the two extremes?
(3) Is it more useful in later stages of one's career to have a broad skill-set or have more publications in one (limited) area?
Philosophy of Math and Philosophy of Science are both valid subfields of philosophy, though I don't know how active they are. You certainly can find universities with interdisciplinary committees related to those topics. You may not be the guy running the experiments or doing the proofs, but you can be a component in something broader. As an undergrad I worked on a project with a philosophy prof, a psych prof, and a computer science prof (cognitive science committee) once. Look around a bit.
I think this is a good question, but I have only a brief, partial answer: you may have to accept that, in pursuing the interdisciplinary topics that interest you, the time and energy you spend will not be repaid with any kind of academic currency, but only in less tangible forms. In other words, you may never get a better job, get an extra paper published, or even get an extra pat on the back from a colleague; but you may nonetheless, in a subtle and unsung way, advance the anti-specialization principles you espouse simply by doggedly producing quality work that embodies them. This may sound cynical, but I mean it seriously. Of course, you need enough tangible reward to keep your career going, but it sounds like you're asking about how or whether to invest the energy to go the extra mile above and beyond that. It's possible to derive internal comfort from believing that you're doing your best to produce the kind of work you think needs to be produced, even if doing so doesn't earn you any praise or advance your career in any concrete way. In the end, whether you continue to do this work will depend on whether you can be happy and sane doing it, and drawing strength from your inner conviction, rather than from external validation, can help with that.
I would upvote this answer ten times if I could :-)
Re: "happy and sane": I do not have any proof for it, only my (and not only mine) belief, but doing anything beyond one's narrow specialized field is a good way to preserve sanity in academia.
Good question, but likely to be closed as "opinion-based" or "too broad". My (opinion-based) take below.
Career-wise, you can likely luck out or strike out with either approach. You can turn into the world's foremost expert on a teensy, tiny special sub-sub-sub-field. If this turns out to be an important field for the next decades and your reviewers like it, then you are in luck. However, every subfield will likely be sucked dry at some point in time, so even the most specialized specialist will need to switch fields, methods or something else at least at some point in their career. Suppose you were the world's top expert on some obscure topic sexy in 1985, as a freshly-minted Ph.D. - I don't think this will still be quite as hot today. So a one-trick pony will need to switch tricks now and then.
Note that you need some consensus in your field that your one trick at the moment is actually hot. It's bad if you write a grant application and your reviewers groan "not again; he's been milking this particular technique for ten years now, when will he finally stop?"
Alternatively, you can do what you seem to prefer: become proficient in multiple connected fields. This will mean that you won't be the mother of all experts in any of them. But you may just become the person who can actually see, explain and analyze the connections between these fields. Given that there is more and more emphasis on interdisciplinary research these days (which I'd say makes a lot of sense and likely is here to stay), you are well placed to become the linchpin getting disparate single-topic experts together to write grants or papers.
Of course, you still need to pick fields that actually have some connection with each other. You may be interested in all of Shakespeare's plays, high-dimensional complex geometry and parallelized software development, but it will be hard to bring these disparate strands together into a coherent whole.
So you will again need to impress reviewers that your combination makes sense. If your interdisciplinary approach is reviewed by focused experts, these may not appreciate what they perceive as "no expertise" in your research.
(Incidentally, by beautiful wife goes the second route. She is likely not the world's greatest geneticist, nor the world's greatest clinical psychologist or therapist, but she does pretty good interdisciplinary research on the genetics of certain psychological conditions and their therapy. Among other things. She started this type of jack-of-multiple-trades approach after her Ph.D.)
I have seen the metaphor of "T-shaped people": people who have a limited understanding of a lot of things (the horizontal bar of the T), but are experts in depth in at least some particular topic (the vertical bar). This is the ideal my employer wants us to strive for - we should neither be "I-shaped" (all expertise, no general knowledge) nor "minus sign-shaped" (all general knowledge, no expertise). This makes sense to me.
Thanks for your excellent answer. But I get the feeling that OP would be interested in whether it is practical/valued to be a π-shaped person. And if not, I would :)
I have found that a middle-of-the-road approach works best. Scientifically minded individuals tend to be perfectionists. While it is important to pay attention to details, perfection does not exist and life is short. Keep your eye on the prize and make your mark on the world but don't forget to have a life.
Read some of the books about Richard Feynman. By all accounts a genius but by his own admissions said he was mostly like others but had developed a few special "tools" or ways of looking at a problem. So yes, explore avenues that may not have immediate rewards but may have value for the future. Great discoveries are often overlooked by the unprepared mind...
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.084143 | 2015-01-02T18:01:49 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/35122",
"authors": [
"A you",
"Adam10",
"Aubrey",
"Corinna Engel",
"DmytroSytro",
"Eric Stucky",
"FloMei",
"Ilovephysixs",
"Linear",
"Liz Felton",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14070",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26682",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96792",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96793",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96794",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96805",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96806",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96807",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96810",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96863",
"mbork",
"user3294195",
"user96807"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
21654 | Short papers at computer science conferences
What is the purpose of short papers at computer science conferences?
I’m a first year PhD student. I spent a few months working with my supervisor on a long paper that we submitted to a conference. I then spent two weeks working on a short paper for the same conference. My supervisor said that it is fine to submit.
Would it have been better working on four or five short papers instead of one long paper? Or are short papers not well regarded at all—should I not consider working on them in the future?
"Would it of been better working on 4-5 short papers instead of 1 long paper?" Very likely not.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.085109 | 2014-05-29T18:07:04 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21654",
"authors": [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
124492 | When to give up seeking justice after you've been plagiarized?
I found that a Ph.D. student, recently graduated, plagiarized over a dozen passages from a book I based on my own Ph.D. dissertation of some years ago.
Their dissertation is on the Internet, which is how I became aware of the plagiarism. I am in the US, I should say, while the student’s university is in another country (not a third-world country, as someone asked, and it is one with rules similar to those in the US about plagiarism).
In most instances the student cited me as a source at the end of sometimes long, closely paraphrased passages. I believe this still constitutes plagiarism in the form of "excessive paraphrasing."
As UNC-Chapel Hill notes, for example:
Even if you cite your source, paraphrasing can still be plagiarism if all you do is rearrange the author's words, delete a phrase or two, or insert a few synonyms and claim the passage as your own.
When I reported the student to their dissertation committee chairperson, nothing happened. The chairperson did not even report the matter as required to the administration.
Dissatisfied, I took the matter to the university's director of student ethics, who told me I had a strong case not only for plagiarism, but for unprofessional conduct. The director assigned a random professor to investigate, who to my surprise absolved the student of wrongdoing. The only reason given was lack of evidence of intent to deceive.
Again dissatisfied, I took the matter to the president of the university, who agreed to hear my concern. Once I revealed the nature of that concern, however, the president no longer responded to me. Even the president's assistant, whom the president had included in the discussion, no longer responded.
I have been careful not to come across as a loon (between the president and his assistant, for example, I sent a mere four emails, only two of which were follow-ups saying "I haven't heard from you: can you confirm receipt?") In short, I think I have responded as any rational person might in such a situation.
I should add I am an experienced scholar widely known in my field. (Granted, it's a narrow field.) But because I am no longer affiliated with a university, I have no one to represent me. (My publisher did contact the student formally and threaten legal action, but, again, only if the student should publish the plagiarized text.)
I was told by an attorney friend there is no point involving attorneys because there is no material loss on my part. If, however, the student publishes the dissertation as a book, then an attorney could be involved, even if the loss involved is negligible. (We aren't talking Harry Potter, after all, but obscure academic works.)
My question is: at what point should I give up seeking justice? (I would have been content with the student merely rewriting the paraphrased material – but discussions never reached the subject of remediation. That's all I really want to achieve, and I think having been caught and having to revise the text would have been punitive enough for the student.)
Realted, possibly helpful: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/121181/my-advisors-new-student-copied-parts-of-my-phd-thesis-advisor-doesnt-care-wh/121211#121211
Answers in comments and mostly obsolete requests have been moved to chat. Please post new comments only if you expect them to result in the question being improved or if they contain relevant references (see this FAQ). If you want to suggest alternative channels to seek justice, please do so in chat.
Let it go, dude. You're going to ruin some kid's life over a few sentences? Totally deranged moral priorities.
@ Parseltongue I have let it go, as I noted last week below to einpoklum. And I do concur with you that the response need not be extreme. This being said, should we never entertain the idea of reporting a transgression because we might "ruin some kid's life"? Actually, the person in question is decades into adulthood and they didn't borrow "a few sentences," but passage after passage after passage - enough to fill four printed pages single-spaced. Also, my goal is not to ruin the student's life: I merely wanted the affected passages to be rewritten. I don't think that would be asking much.
@Grinnell "my goal is not to ruin the student's life" are you sure?! By contacting president of the university and an attorney perhaps your goal is not to ruin the student's life?! I mean I don't wanna say student was right in his/her action but I mean make sure your actions at least are in the level of alleged misconduct...
@ Alone Programmer "By contacting president ... and an attorney perhaps your goal is not to ruin the student's life?" It does not affect the student for me to informally ask an attorney friend about my options. As for contacting the president, I did so not to complain about the student per se but to question the outcome of the investigation, which I found suspect. "make sure your actions at least are in the level of alleged misconduct" Likewise, the university should respond in proportion to the level of alleged misconduct. If the student did no or little wrong, the result will stand.
As you know, there are two separate issues with plagiarism:
Claiming ideas as one's own
Claiming words as one's own
You have a legitimate concern about the second -- if this student is going to directly use your words, he needs to use quotes. Attempts to get around this by making one or two insignificant changes are not appropriate.
That said, I can understand why the president of the university didn't want to get involved -- as academic crimes go, this one is quite minor. I agree that the "lack of intent to deceive" ruling was erroneous, which is unfortunate; getting the student to re-write the content, with no other penalty, would have been a far more appropriate outcome.
At what point should I give up seeking justice?
I think it would be appropriate to reach out to the student (I would have started here, personally), their advisor, and the university's ombudsperson (in that order), just asking them to rewrite those sections and to not do it again. If they refuse, it would probably take a lawyer to get them to listen -- but you don't have any damages (not even to your reputation), so that seems a bit excessive in this case.
Actually, paraphrasing is a legitimate way to cite, in which case quotes aren't needed. But quoting without indicating it is a quote is wrong, And, again, if it is cited, then it isn't an attempt to claim it as your own.
Paraphrasing is fine, but this student seems to have copied a long passage word-for-word, made one or two trivial changes, and then said "oh, I made some insignificant changes, so I don't need the quotation marks anymore." This would not be appropriate -- paraphrasing entails a non-trivial re-write of the material, ideally to place it in a novel context. By not using quotes, the student is (inadvertently) claiming to have done this. But yeah, if the student did make non-trivial changes to the text, then there is no issue at all.
@Buffy There are acceptable and unacceptable forms of paraphrasing. Clearly, many universities feel it is possible to excessively paraphrase. One need only google excessive paraphrasing or paraphrase excessively plus the suffix .edu to see what I mean.
You seem to be confusing two things. Copyright is about words. Plagiarism is about ideas. If you have something copyrighted (almost anything you write and publish) copying your words is possibly a violation. The other paper may be have overstepped the bounds of copyright here.
But if they credit you with the underlying ideas behind the words, then it isn't plagiarism and is probably why people stop responding when you explain what happened. If the other person says or implies "these are my ideas" when, in fact, they are yours, they have plagiarized and that is true even if they use none of your words to express the idea.
But if you are credited, it just isn't plagiarism. A reader of the other work seem to be able to go to your work to find a more complete context of the idea and the original words.
You may, however, have a copyright claim or not, but it is a completely different issue. It is possible, also, that in publishing a book, you gave your copyright to your publisher. In that case it is up to them to make the claim.
Note that I'm not saying that what was done was ok, just that it better to be accurate in a claim of wrongdoing than to be inaccurate and confuse things.
And to be honest, I'm not close enough to the problem nor do I know enough to be able to say definitively that there is wrongdoing here or not. So I reserve judgement on that.
Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.
@Buffy For instance, imagine you wrote a proof that the Halting problem is undecidable. Then in my paper I also write a proof that the Halting problem is undecidable. This is not plagiarism, because this proof is so well-known and taught and studied in every computer science class that nobody will worry about misappropriation of the proof's idea. But now imagine that in my paper I include this poem, and claim it as my own: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/~gpullum/loopsnoop.html . Now this would be plagiarism because of the words used in the proof (the ideas are still the same as when it wasn't plagia)
Since my comments were not addressed and have now been deleted, I will post an answer.
I don't really know what you are hoping to achieve here. I suspect the university also doesn't know what you are hoping to achieve and that explains why they aren't responding.
You say you are seeking "justice", which is a vague and ominous term. You later clarify that your goal is just to have the student rewrite the offending passages, but that you never discussed this with the university.
Generally, once something has been archived (such as a thesis being accepted by the university library), it cannot be edited. To do so would undermine the integrity of the archive. Errata can be published, but the original item remains. My own PhD thesis contains some typos that I would like to fix, but I am not allowed to.
I have heard of a story of a PhD thesis that became crucial evidence in a large lawsuit. Even the typos were scrutinized in court. A librarian was flown around the world to swear to the integrity and availability of the archive. This stuff matters.
Hence I think your desire to have the passages rewritten is not realistic.
It may be physically possible for this to be done, but that does not mean it is allowed.
Thus I can only interpret your quest for justice as a desire to see the student's degree revoked. I don't see what other action the university could take. That is a very drastic step and not one the university would take lightly.
It sounds like the university conducted an investigation and concluded that there was insufficient grounds for degree revocation. That does not mean that they absolved the student of wrongdoing, only that the wrongdoing was not sufficient to merit that punishment.
While I do not know the details, it sounds like the plagiarism was on the minor end of the scale. The original source was cited. The passages were paraphrased, rather than direct quotes. Your original question stated it was "over a dozen passages", which sounds like it is only a small part of the thesis.
Potentially the student didn't know that this is not allowed. Such misunderstandings of academic ethics are not uncommon.
For a degree to be revoked, there needs to be much more than a minor mistake or misunderstanding.
Perhaps I should have said upfront what I wanted the end result of my complaint to be (revising the pertinent text) - but that is the sort of determination easier seen in hindsight or with experience in such issues -- neither of which I had the luxury of drawing on. I reported the transgression, as I thought proper, and while I wish I could show examples of the plagiarism, I cannot: I can only assure you the instances of plagiarism are extensive and blatant . . . and yet the only reason given for exoneration of the student was lack of evidence for intent to deceive.
You've unfortunately equated justice with a conviction rather than with recognition of wrong
There are two issues with that PhD candidate (call him X)'s thesis:
Did it contain inappropriate excessive paraphrasing?
If so, is X culpable (legally/in a disciplinary sense)?
It seems you've demanded that (2.) be answered positively, and mostly ignored (1.) - so much so that you haven't even mentioned whether the investigator found that the thesis did include excessive paraphrasing.
I have been careful not to come across as a loon (between the president and his assistant, for example, I sent a mere four emails, only two of which were follow-ups saying "I haven't heard from you: can you confirm receipt?")
Perhaps, but it seems you may have come off as a revenge-seeker.
In short, I think I have responded as any rational person might in such a situation.
People are not rational; or rather, it's a problematic concept.
Many "rational" people would have behaved differently; some would not care about the excessive paraphrasing at all.
I should add I am an experienced scholar widely known in my field.
Then it reflects poorly on you to pursue this too far - regardless of whether you've been wronged or not. This, as opposed to someone whose sole significant contribution has been thus plagiarized.
My publisher did contact the student formally and threaten legal action, but, again, only if the student should publish the plagiarized text.
(Balk.)
I was told by an attorney friend there is no point involving attorneys because there is no material loss on my part.
You needed an attorney friend to tell you that?
Bottom line:
My question is: at what point should I give up seeking justice?
At this point.
You've not damaged your reputation so far, except perhaps mildly with the president and his assistant. But if you continue pursuing this - you probably will.
Your points are well taken. Before taking action I showed the passages in question to several academic colleagues in various disciplines at various US universities, and with one exception they concurred the plagiarism was serious. Then the director of ethics at the student's university said the matter was (quote) "serious" and that I had a "strong case" for proving plagiarism and unprofessional conduct. I filed a formal complaint and, inexplicably, lost. Up to that point I merely followed the school's procedure. Only the appeal to the university president went beyond standard procedure.
"except perhaps mildly with the president and his assistant. But if you continue pursuing this - you probably will." I think you're right, and based on the aggregate of the replies here I think there is nothing more I can or should do.
@Grinnell: I sympathize with your predicament. There are certain offenses which are very easy to carry out, but very difficult to have the perpetrator of which made to face any consequences. While I don't see how the plagiarism is that serious, I know that if I had, I'd be extremely exasperated.
There are two kinds of plagiarism:
of ideas / scientific plagiarism (fully solved by a citation of the original work). Buffy's answers here and on a followup question have some good insight into why this is such a big deal (e.g. for future scholars wanting to know the scientific context in which something was written).
of the wording. Taking credit for the wording doesn't hurt the scientific value of the work (and thus is less serious), but still makes the author look like a more skilled wordsmith than they are. (Unless they do it badly/clumsily; see @Ben's answer on the followup.)
Aside from plagiarism (taking false credit), this also violates the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights of the creator, specifically the right of attribution of your wording. Some countries give legal weight to the moral rights of the creator beyond just the usual fixed-term / dollar-value copyright. (And if the work was published, could also be traditional economic copyright infringement)
Citing and then slightly paraphrasing instead of quoting with quote marks implies that the idea is from the cited work, but the wording is fully original. If that's not the case, it's a violation of the moral right of attribution of the original author for the wording, as well as plagiarism.
And if published, also becomes an issue of traditional copyright violation and suing for damages. If that's not the case, and only the moral right of the author have been violated, I'm not clear on what if any legal penalties there might actually be. And it's still plagiarism, which is a separate thing.
The student has violated your moral right of attribution for your wording of the explanation. This is probably a large part of what's bothering you so much, not (just) the plagiarism.
Perhaps you didn't get anywhere when contacting people if they weren't clear you were not talking about "scientific plagiarism" (lack of citation), which is the much more serious issue that would definitely warrant contacting people up to and including the head of the university.
In hindsight you might have had better luck if you could start fresh after reading these answers, but at this point I think the ship has sailed on getting the passages actually quoted, or more fully rewritten (at least as an erratum). Or at least an apology, which might have been all that was feasible given the restrictions on (not) modifying university archives after the fact, even to fix errors.
(I wrote the rest of this answer before looking into moral rights as something separate from copyright and plagiarism.)
Plagiarism of wording is a different kind of offence from copyright infringement: the victims are people that are tricked into being impressed by the person's ability to express ideas with words, when in fact it wasn't actually their word-crafting ability that resulted in the clear explanation found in the work they wrote.
In copyright infringement, you would be the victim, and suffer damages from someone else profiting from your creative work. (Presumably instead of you, this is the main point of copyright law.)
Since they cite the work they're paraphrasing, they're not trying to hide the source. Anyone who looks will see that their wording looks like yours, but yours must be the original because they cite you.
The student has done something wrong, but it's hard to find any way to say that they've wronged you directly. Their writing doesn't diminish your reputation, it just makes you unhappy with them for trying to take advantage of your work to achieve their goal (getting a degree?) with less effort than they should have needed. i.e. trying to cheat the system, not cheat you.
Keep that in mind when pursuing "justice". It's obviously more personal to you when someone passes off your words as their own, with only minor rephrasing, but in terms of any academic or legal consequences this is probably not too different from pursuing a random stranger for littering in a public park. Or maybe for running slightly inside the lines in a race (which you weren't competing in) at a sporting even. Or pick any minor offense where society / the public is the victim.
I'm talking about plagiarism of wording like you discuss, not of ideas / scientific data / results. Again that's similar in that the original source isn't damaged in a legal sense by the plagiarizer, but it does much more damage to science as a whole than passing off someone else's wording as your own.
To help separate plagiarism from copyright infringement, consider a case of someone trying to pass off a piece of old public-domain work as their own.
It's still plagiarism even if nobody knows who wrote the original passage. e.g. an anonymous work, or something like a folk tale / oral tradition.
Let's take Shakespeare's writing as an example (and pretend that it wouldn't be recognized right away by someone). They aren't harming the bard. (Well you could imagine slight indirect harm if they end up associating Shakespeare's phrasing of something with clumsy un-enjoyable work, so people enjoy the original less when they read / hear it.)
But even if they directly harming Shakespeare's reputation, that's not what plagiarism is about: it's about taking undeserved credit. It's not solely up to the person who's words were copied to enforce anything, it's up to anyone who notices or is made aware to call out the plagiarizer. If the plagiarizer is working on behalf of anyone (e.g. a speechwriter), they might be fired for making the person giving the speech look bad.
(Or before publishing, up to their editors or anyone else to stop them from trying to commit accidental or intentional plagiarism.)
In your case, the people you contacted should have got the student to rewrite or actually quote the passages. I think you've done your part by calling attention to the plagiarism. If you want to publicly call attention to it in some way, that would be the last step that would be worth taking. But honestly it does sound like pretty minor plagiarism, and making too much of a stink would (unfortunately) be more likely to make you look petty and vindictive in some people's eyes.
To answer your question: "now".
You've been thoughtful in the process. And your question is well written-rings true. I buy that the plagiarism was blatant.
Unfortunately, it is a fact that academic "policing" can be weak in many aspects. You've done the responsible thing to bring it up. This is better than just turning the other cheek (would bug you if you hadn't done it). But obsessing on it, given a process has run is not worth it either. At this point, will just distract you.
Hopefully just having the process run on the miscreant has put a scare in him.
Unless there is some serious ongoing situation of continued theft (future behavior versus you), I would not pursue it further.
The obvious ways to pursue it further are legal (expensive) or social (e.g. blog posts, Youtube videos with you reading the passages, etc.). Personally I wouldn't bother. Think you have done enough and the ongoing danger (of new thefts) seems low. Also the impacts are really not that serious financially--not like plagiarism in personal training and nutrition writing. It's not like the guy is becoming a rival to you based on his writing. Not even in a journal. (Note, I'm not excusing the sin.)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.085255 | 2019-02-06T17:07:07 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/124492",
"authors": [
"Bryan Krause",
"Buffy",
"Ethan Bolker",
"Grinnell",
"Mithridates the Great",
"Parseltongue",
"Stef",
"Wrzlprmft",
"cag51",
"einpoklum",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104104",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104328",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126851",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7018",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98164"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
34658 | In what cases are you able to start a postdoc without a "conferred" PhD?
Many PhD programs only confer their degrees one, two or three times per year. If you successfully defend and submit your dissertation after the scheduled conferral date, you must wait until the next one to get the PhD. At many of these schools you can ask for an official document that basically states that all requirements for the PhD have been successfully completed and the degree will be conferred on the next conferral date.
Do postdoctoral research positions accept this type of official document in lieu of a PhD, to begin work, if a PhD is required? Is this specific from position to position or country to country? I will be receiving a PhD in the US and looking for postdocs in either the US, Canada, Europe, Japan or Australia.
Note this question is less about applying to postdocs and more about officially starting them. In other words, assume you have accepted a post doc offer, and the job requires a PhD, would having an official letter from the University stating the dissertation is done and everyone has signed off suffice to start?
I don't think there's a general answer; it will depend on whether you impress them enough that they're willing to waive that requirement. How much will be needed to impress them will vary by school(s), by program(s), by who you have been working with and who you will be working with and what your recommendations look like and...
This also depends on what legally constitutes the end of the study in your country. Just now I am after my defense, but I will get my diploma in May. Nevertheless my study is legally finished and I am entitled to use the title by the law. Therefore the certificate from the university does not say "all requirements are completed" it really says that I finished the study and received the title "PhD".
My university offered that if I needed the PhD before the next ceremony (or couldn't attend), I could a) have certified copies or b) get it without ceremony. On the other hand, I have been on postdoc positions (both regarding responsibilities and salary) for several years before. Depends quite a bit on negotiations and whether the institute is convinced they want you, and that you will nicely do the job etc, last but not least also on the local culture (whether negotiations are possible at all).
I agree that you would have to ask each individual department to know for sure. However, I would say that if you have completed all the requirements (including a successful dissertation defense), you have an official letter to that effect, and the delay before the conferral of the degree is beyond your control, then it would be pretty unreasonable for a department to refuse to let you start a postdoc on those grounds. Of course, unreasonable policies do exist.
One slightly more likely possibility is that you might have to start with a different job title, and lower salary, until your degree is officially conferred.
I defended in June, started my postdoc in August, and my degree was issued in October. My PhD advisor told me, due to scheduling, he didn't even defend until after he'd started his postdoc. As others have said, contact the postdoctoral institution. I suspect the most important detail for them is that you will have defended your thesis (successfully) before showing up.
Most postdoc offers come with the condition that the candidate will have a PhD by the time that they start the job. In many cases showing the PhD is part of the initial paperwork.
If you want to start a postdoc with a document saying that all requirements have been met and the degree will be formally conferred at such and such a date, I think the only way to proceed is to ask the institution whether this will be acceptable. I don't think you can predict the answer by looking through the nuances of the job ad.
I was once asked by someone who had accepted a postdoc offer at my university (UGA) whether or not she could start the position with such a document. She came from an institution that only formally conferred degrees once a year. From my perspective, the key point is that I had no idea what the answer was, but I brought it up with my colleagues and the department head, it went further up in the university, and the answer came back: OK, so long as all requirements have been met. (In the end the candidate decided to push harder and actually get the degree awarded in the summer before arrival.)
I have also seen a postdoc -- at a very prestigious American university -- started by someone who had not written her thesis by the time of arrival. The next semester she accepted a second, semester-long postdoctoral position and only around the end of the spring semester did I learn that she was still writing up her thesis. (It worked out fine for her, and today she is a well-known strong person in the field.) The idea of starting a postdoc before completing your thesis is one of those things that would simply never have occurred to me, but apparently it happens. As with most things, having a very influential advisor couldn't hurt.
(My understanding is that in the humanities, it is relatively common for someone to start a tenure-track job without a PhD. They are then given a certain amount of time to complete their PhD while simultaneously navigating all the difficulties of their new job. This practice -- which is almost begging for trouble, in my opinion, and most of the stories I have heard that start this way end badly -- is all but unheard of in mathematics, because there is usually a postdoc done in between. You should probably have a PhD by the time you finish your postdoc!)
Moral: you really need to ask.
Let me end with a remark which leans towards the obvious: nothing is for sure until it happens, but if you have some specific reason to doubt that you'll have a PhD by the start time of a postdoc, you should bring that up ASAP and ideally before you accept the position in the first place. In the current job market, there is no lack of qualified candidates with PhD in hand.
Agreed. There are many people in the humanities and humanistic social sciences who start TT jobs without finishing their dissertations. This puts them at a severe disadvantage at tenure-time because they essentially have less time on the clock compared to their peers who came dissertation on hand.
"In mathematics... there is usually a postdoc done in between": at least, for those going to R1 tenure-track positions. Math departments at institutions with lower research activity very often make tenure-track hires straight out of grad school.
If the postdoc requires "degree in hand" by a certain date, then there's little flexibility. The actual degree must be conferred by the university.
That being said, a good number of postdocs instead require that all of the requirements for the PhD be completed before a certain date. This usually means that that the dissertation has been deposited, if not defended. On the extreme end of flexibility, some will simply take the word of the dissertation advisor that the dissertation will be finished by the start date.
Some postdocs will even allow you to start without a degree in hand if all of the requirements for the degree have been satisfied. Some will be satisfied with a letter from the advisor, others will require a letter from the registrar. How strict they will be may be correlated to how many times they've been burned in the past with non-completers.
I don't think there are stats are on how many postdocs (and in which fields) are strict vs. flexible. What I think you'll find is that once a flexible department has been burned by a "postdoc" who never finished their PhD, then they shift to being more strict.
tl;dr: Ask the postdoc program if they are willing to be flexible and if so, which documentation they require.
The "all requirements have been completed" letter should be pretty solid burn insurance, as the candidate doesn't actually have to do anything else to receive the degree. I think such a letter would normally imply that the thesis is completed, defended, and approved by everyone.
The problem is that committees usually evaluate postdoc proposals in March so we get "all requirements will be completed by June/July/August" letters. Unfortunately, they aren't always. Sometimes the advisor is being optimistic, sometimes the student suffers a major fail and just can't finish the last 10% of the dissertation.
Certainly, but I don't think that is what this question is asking (an edit has clarified it). The applicant here is already past the point you describe - the committee has decided and the applicant has an offer in hand, contingent on finishing the degree by the start date. The question is whether the "have been completed" letter is enough by the start date.
@NateEldredge No one can answer that question except for the folks managing that specific postdoc. I added material to my answer noting various contingencies.
@RoboKaren Yep, I can't imagine a department has ever been burned with a letter from the registrar. However, I can imagine departments being burned with a letter from the advisor/committee/department. In case you are interested in the outcome you can see my answer +1 btw.
"Some postdocs will even allow you to start without a degree" I suspect it is actually "nearly all"
I, the question asker, ended up accepting a postdoc in Australia. The University offered me to start the postdoc without the degree, but at a slightly lower salary (which would then be raised once I had the official degree). I countered by saying that I was willing to wait a couple of months to start the postdoc with the degree, to get two years at the advertised salary and have some time off. The job ad said the start date was negotiable. The University then gave in; they let me start right away anyway, at the advertised salary, without the degree, as the PI really wanted me to start ASAP. Later I found out the rules which hold pretty much universally in Australia. At Australian Universities, you are allowed to start a postdoc without the degree in hand. Australian Universities have a minimum wage for someone with an official PhD. Therefore, Australian universities are allowed to pay you less than the advertised postdoc wage if you don't officially have the degree, and some PIs/Universities will try to get away with this if they can, to save money. However, they are not forced to pay you a lower wage, so you can negotiate to get the advertised wage. Just thought I'd post a follow-up answer in my specific context.
You might wonder, why do Australian Universities allow you to start without the degree. One of the big reasons is that Australian dissertations go through a form of peer-review by people external to the University (rather than just the thesis committee and a department chair/impartial rep). You can imagine all the delays this could create. Therefore, to avoid having all PhD candidates being unemployed for months/years while their theses go through peer review (and foreign students immediately being deported!) it is generally seen as fine by PIs to start a postdoc as long as the thesis has been submitted for external peer-review. Most PIs will want the thesis written so they aren't working too much on their thesis while doing their postdoc.
"Australian Universities have a minimum wage for someone with an official PhD." Is that an Award wage, or something they negotiated with unions? (For non-Australians, Award wages are the legal minimum wage, and vary depending on industry, job, and level of education and experience.)
@nick012000 yes I believe it is National Tertiary Education Union negotiated, but there are only 30 or so universities in Australia so they all cooperate with the national union.
In the UK it is common to begin a "post-doc" while still working on your PhD - my funding stopped after 3.5 years. I then did a 6-month 'postdoc', and began a second 'postdoc' while finishing my PhD and submitting it.
There is an expectation that you are still working towards your PhD, and you will often receive a lower salary until you have your PhD.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.086922 | 2014-12-22T01:06:20 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34658",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Nate Eldredge",
"RoboKaren",
"Vladimir F Героям слава",
"WetlabStudent",
"cbeleites",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10225",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14273",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81424",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9365",
"keshlam",
"nick012000",
"user2379888"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
40260 | How to motivate speakers to give less specialized talks at a "colloquium?"
Our applied math department is beginning to have a serious attendance problem at our colloquium. The appropriate level for our colloquium is that any person with an undergraduate degree in a quantitative/theoretical field should be able to follow the talk as long as they are paying close attention.
In an invitation letter to our speakers, who are mostly faculty members at other Universities in a variety of fields but also include some faculty at our university, we say
"Your talk should be entirely self contained. You can assume the audience is mathematically mature and has a solid understanding of undergraduate real analysis and linear algebra but do not assume any prior knowledge in physics, biology or more specialized mathematics. Of course feel free to talk about such topics, just be sure to explain all basic concepts needed to follow the rest of the presentation as soon as they come up."
Despite this warning, speakers go on, as usual, giving seminar level talks. Graduate students and the few advanced undergraduates that used to attend have basically stopped attending, which looks bad on our department, and lowers graduate student morale. Note the target audience is not undergrads. The target audience is first year grad students (and up) and faculty from many different quantitative fields.
I think part of the problem is that speakers assume applied math means "The math done in my field of research". They don't understand despite us linking to our graduate student's list of research interests in the email that applied math is extremely broad. Some researchers will have never taken probability theory or optimization and some who work in theoretical computer science haven't studied a differential equation since their sophomore years of college. And science backgrounds outside of math will be even broader.
Besides adding the request in our email, that the talk not be too technical, is there anyway to prevent speakers from giving talks that are too specialized or advanced?
Maybe part of the problem is calling it a "colloquium", which generally implies that the intended audience is faculty and advanced grad students. You say you want the intended audience to be someone with an undergrad degree; your quoted passage sounds more like it describes third- or fourth-year undergraduates. So maybe you should begin pitching it as an undergraduate colloquium. Of course, it's possible you will find fewer speakers willing to try to describe their work to an (effectively) undergraduate audience.
But what I'm saying is, the knowledge that you want your speakers to assume is the knowledge that a good third-year undergraduate in mathematics (not yet graduated) would have, or less.
@NateEldredge that is not "generally implied." It is common that a colloquium means the audience is "the whole department," at least in theory, not just advanced grads and faculty. Typically this means a few very advanced undergrads, most of the grad students, and most of the faculty. Of course, due to the problem I describe colloquia often "turn into" only being for faculty and advanced grad students. Perhaps what you mean by generally implies is "in practice". Of course in pure mathematics the letter would have stronger math prerequisites, but this is not a math department.
I don't even understand the title for some of the colloquium talks in our physics department, which covers theoretical astrophysics, particle physics, biophysics, atmospheric physics, and climate science.
One important thing to do is to be more choosey about inviting speakers who you know are capable of presenting to a broad audience. Some people will never give an accessible talk, no matter what you do. Others are good at speaking to a broad audience. Some good ways to find such speakers:
People who do cross-disciplinary work are often really good at this, since they are generally used to speaking to non-specialists (i.e., people who are specialists in the other disciplines that they work with).
Look for people who have recent survey publications which are broadly accessible, or who have had recent articles or other publications in the popular media.
If you go to conferences and workshops, look for people who give accessible talks, even to a specialist audience. The best speakers will always frame their work accessibly, even when the meat of it is extremely specialized.
Once you have invited a speaker, make the speaker give you a full abstract, as well as a title. If the abstract is getting too technical, it's a bad sign for the talk. Send it back with request for revision to attract a broader audience. This can help people adjust expectations, though you can never prevent a speaker from speaking badly once they've begun.
If you feel brave, you might even explicitly challenge your speakers more in the information that you send them. My favorite series that I have ever been involved in organizing was the "Seminar on Dangerous Ideas" that I helped create when I was a graduate student, and which ran for about five years. This seminar was really trying to push people outside the box, and one of the ways we did it was to ask the speakers to address "the five questions", which included things like "Why should I fear your research?" and "What should I tell my mom about it?" Many of the best talks that I have ever heard were in this series, because the challenges that we gave were able to create an atmosphere in which academics felt safe to say things they otherwise would not.
You'll also need to work to revive your existing seminar series. A good way to do that is to line up several speakers in a row who you are certain will have broad appeal and be able to give a good talk.
Dangerous ideas is superb! I will try to steal it, let's see if it condenses.
So, the format is, a speaker presents a talk answering the five questions, and then there is a free discussion?
@Davidmh Please do! As for the format: it was pretty free-form. We gave that as a starting point, encouraged people to view that as inspiration rather than requirements, and speakers took it in a lot of different directions. Some talks had a lot of discussion - others not so much. We also encouraged the audience to ask questions during the talk, rather than waiting to the end.
I think there are a couple of layers to the problem:
The wording of your request to the speaker could be more clear. You should be very specific that you encourage graduate students to attend the department talks, so please keep the talk accessible for non-experts.
Some of the speakers may not be prepared or able to give a (I presume 30 to 50 minute long) "popular science" style talk on their current research. Some things are much more difficult to distil than others. Either that, or (donning my Hat of Cynicism) they're ignoring your request because they don't want to write a whole new presentation or they didn't read the email properly.
Perhaps you could ask the guest directly if they are able to distil their research down to a talk that is appropriate for a grad student not familiar with the field. If they decline, make it clear in the talk invitation that it is a specialized presentation. If the speaker agrees to do this, you should explicitly tell your grad students that the talk should be accessible for them. This will avoid them feeling as if they wasted their time attending high-level talks, thus they'll be more likely to attend the others.
My question may have been originally unclear. Can you edit your answer so it matches the fact that the target audience is not undergrads.
I would suggest saying in the invitation "The appropriate level for our colloquium is that any person with an undergraduate degree in a quantitative/theoretical field should be able to follow the talk as long as they are paying close attention. The target audience is first year grad students (and up) and academics in many different quantitative fields". I don't know what it means for a talk to be entirely self-contained, and that kind of wording encourages the inference that this is supposed to be a general public lecture -- then the remainder of the guideline shows how that's not so. Therefore I would expand on what the first sentence means.
I take it the problem is not that the talks are at too low a level, but rather they are at too high a level. Saying that "the audience is mathematically mature" may encourage reaching too high -- I tend to think of ABD grads and faculty as being "mature" in a discipline. If the problem is that speakers are interjecting arcana from physics or biology or unrelated areas of math, then you need to strengthen the "do not assume" clause. Make it a sentence on its own, and elaborate.
In this case, Wiki's characterization of "mathematical maturity" is very naive. (I'm not only being cute...) It's more about things like the pre-rigorous/rigorous/post-rigorous phases popularized by Terry Tao, for example.
@paulgarrett I really love Terry Tao's phrases "pre-rigorous/rigorous/post-rigorous", however, wikipedia's definition, of mathematical maturity paraphrased as comfortable with abstraction is how it is most commonly used. For example, see this matheducators.stackaexchange question http://matheducators.stackexchange.com/questions/1403/how-to-convey-the-meaning-of-mathematical-maturity
@WetLabStudent, I agree, that's how the phrase is often used, but my point is that it misses the mark, especially RE peoples' self-assessments. And, anyway, declaring that the prereqs are this-or-that doesn't magically make it so, either.
@paulgarrett yes, I think we agree on that.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.088059 | 2015-02-20T20:06:44 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/40260",
"authors": [
"A. Mar",
"Anonymous Professor",
"Ayman Arif",
"Cmg",
"Davidmh",
"Frederick Brummer",
"Gass DL",
"Hivemind",
"Joker123",
"Lola",
"Lorenzo",
"Melinda",
"Mohsen Tavoosi محسن طاوسی",
"Nate Eldredge",
"WetlabStudent",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108384",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108385",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108386",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108387",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108388",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108392",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108396",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108397",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108399",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108405",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108408",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108416",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/108657",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"jakebeal",
"kmichael08",
"paul garrett",
"user108384"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
43100 | What should I do if I want to withdraw my paper from a journal but they ignore my request?
I submitted my paper seven months ago and it is still under review. I sent several emails to the handling editor but I didn't get any response except every time I sent an email the status date was changed. So I decided to withdraw my paper from journal and I have written a letter to the editor-in-chief but he didn't reply except the status date was changed again! What should I do now?
One possibility to put this to an end would be to submit to another journal by an e-mail where you would explain the situation (the paper has been submitted elsewhere, you withdrew it when you realized it was not handled properly, and you got no acknowledgment of this withdrawal), and with a CC to the editor-in-chief of the first journal. That way, the editors of the new journal would know for certain that you withdrew before submitting again, and you would be covered from possible accusations by the first journal. However this corners the first journal in a difficult situation, so it might make them react violently; I would warn them before hand, and only use this as a last recourse.
You can also try to get advice and help from a senior in your field, who will know the editors and might help smooth things out.
A third possibility would be to contact a relevant committee in an academic society (EMS has an ethics committee that could be contacted about a publication in a math journal for example).
I should add we resubmitted the paper to the journal. the first time the process of reviewing the paper was less than 2 months and then editor advised us to revise our paper according the reviewers comment and then submit to the journal. we did all that staff but after more than 7 months we have not got any response.
If you have resubmitted after review, then the paper is going back to the original reviewers. I would hesitate to submit it elsewhere. Have you checked your spam folder for possible replies? Have you called the editor-in-chief at his or her institution during posted office hours? I would still contact Elsevier, documenting all attempts to contact the editor-in-chief. They need to put pressure on the editor-in-chief, or install a new one.
Debora, I have checked my spam folder too. Indeed they replied me only by changing the status date. No I haven' called the editor- in -chief yet. yesterday I sent an email to the Editorial office in which I explained all stuffs. As you know , many of Elsevier journals have an option as a "send e-mail". So I used this option to contact with editors as a result I don't have any sent email!
Among your three possibilities, I think the second may work to me ! As I said, I've resubmitted the paper and so I know the first handling editor who advised me to resubmit the paper. But I was wondering whether it is good to contact him. Since I am pretty sure the current handling editor is not him!
The handling editor is the wrong person to chase about this - if they want to withdraw your paper they can, of course, but if they are inactive (which would also explain why your paper is not getting reviewed) then chasing them doesn't do anything. Nobody else will notice, either. The best person to ask is the editorial office. The editorial office 1) works full time 2) sees all activity by all editors, thereby knowing who is active and who is not and 3) knows who to redirect your query to.
If the editorial office is inactive too I'd suggest writing something like "If I don't hear from you by X date, I will assume my paper is withdrawn". Then if X date comes and goes, you can just submit the paper somewhere else.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.088844 | 2015-04-07T09:43:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43100",
"authors": [
"Abambres M",
"Debora Weber-Wulff",
"James",
"Kay S",
"MaxWell",
"Miroslav Milanov",
"Mohamed Ashraf",
"Paula Faulkner",
"httoyotatancang",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116835",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116836",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116837",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116838",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116846",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116850",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116859",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116926",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32489",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32783",
"sarah",
"user116837",
"wild card"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
29219 | How to address a mistake in an old paper in a very prestigious scientific journal?
A Nature paper published in 2000 currently has around 400 citations, but there is a mistake in the paper and surprisingly, still it gets citations. The mistake affects the result of the paper in a way that half of the arguments in the paper are invalid.
I warned the authors two years ago and they confirmed the mistake. I expected them to put some announcement that there is a mistake in the paper to avoid misleading researchers, but unfortunately they have not done so.
How should we address these situations? Should we send a comment and report it to the editor? Is it rude? Or should we simply dismiss it because it is an old paper?
I cannot add comments yes, so this by no means is meant to be the actual answer. Have you tried contacting Retraction Watch? Alternatively, a more direct approach would be to contact the editor and outline the reasons you believe there is an error, including proof of your communications with the authors, admitting they were incorrect.
@I Heart Beats, Thank you for your comment and the weblog. The annoying part is that in science community, in many cases a Nature, Science, or Cell publication (or any high impact factor journal) can change a life; people get job, promotion, and more research funds by these publications. They should be more responsible about what they have published.
@S.A. is this also something you can approach this blog with? http://www.iflscience.com/
I think the main focus is the integrity of the past research and any future investigations that may have been impacted. If you have proof of wrong doing, and clearly this is bothering you or you would not be posting here, is there a way to draw attention to this using scientifically minded social media outlets?
@I Heart Beats, Actually, I prefer the authors of the paper do this by themselves or in an anonymous way. That is why I informed them directly. I do not like to make it public by myself as it does not build any reputation for me. I will look more carefully into the new weblog, looks interesting. Thank you.
Are the authors are reluctant to take action? If so, does this bother you? If it seems that your ideal outcome is not possible, perhaps either you need to let it go (you did mention that the publication is old) or to take action yourself so it can be off your chest. Have there been publications that essentially corrected the original paper with their new knowledge?
One option: correct their method, redo the experiment, prove them wrong, publish the results in Nature and collect the "job, promotion, and more research funds" that you mentioned in your comment.
@I Heart Beats, Yes, they do not like to do that! I guess, they think it damages their reputation as it was one of the first papers in this field. The only reason that I would like it to be corrected is that I spent 2 months on some project based on their results and after that I realised it has some problem. It prevents people to fall into the same wrong loop. Although in their future papers, somehow indirectly, they recovered the mistake, still people refer to the original paper as well.
@Jigg, Sounds great, but I am theoretician :( and the experiment needs quite advanced facilities.
@Gobinath, I guess, they think it damages their reputation as it was one of the first papers in this field, but as you mentioned, it is the best option for them.
@ Jigg, they may also be interested in knowing about it, or perhaps starting a side forum for questionable results etc. The logic was that these people are interested in documenting and exposing scientific injustice, which seems to be the case here.
This answer is low quality. Retraction Watch is not going to get into a dispute over the quality of a paper; they care only about retracted papers, and it is clear that the authors are not retracting the paper, so I feel like the Retraction Watch suggestion is a complete misunderstanding of their focus. As far as contacting the editor, in my personal experience I do not think this is going to lead anywhere useful. The best outcome you can hope for is for the editor to tell you "submit a short response paper and I'll have it refereed"; so why wait to contact the editor? Just do that now.
@IHeartBeats, why did you delete your answer? It was very useful :'(
Have you checked with other people in the subject about this? It happens that some errors in past papers are folklore, well-known to specialist in the field, and that they stay that way for a long time without being documented. This is very unfortunate as it wastes newcomers to the field time and efforts, but you should know the precise unofficial status of the thing before taking action.
Some journals accept a type of short correspondence or comment in which objections to some published material can be submitted. If you can articulate your objections in a scientific way suitable for publishing you may try this approach. For example, imagine the original analysis has some error. Reanalyzing the data gives different results and invalidates the previous publication. Conversely in this approach the authors of the original study have the opportunity to reply to your complaints.
An example of this is a commentary published in Nature Genetics, where the authors highlight important deficiencies in the design of the experiments in an earlier publication that can lead to incorrect conclusions. Of course, the authors of the original paper are allowed to respond to the comments.
Correspondences have the advantage that can be very short. I am not sure at this moment if Nature also accepts this format.
If the material that demonstrates the error in the original publication is substantial it may grant an additional publication. This is for example what happened with the paper that demonstrated the divergence between human and mice inflammatory responses, which led to a response paper analyzing the same data, and arriving at the opposite results.
Thank you, good examples. What about the fact that the paper that I have mentioned published 14 years ago?! Does anyone feel it is pointless to comment on such an old paper? Gravedigging!
@S.A.: I guess "old" is a relative term. In my field (mathematics) a 14 year old paper would be considered pretty recent. "Old" would start at maybe 40 or 50 years.
@NateEldredge, You are right, mathematics never ages! but natural sciences are ageing too fast until they mature really well. I should ask editor to force the authors to write the erratum.
I think the fact that is an old paper should not be considered. If the paper is highly cited and people still cite the paper then it means it has a significant impact. If the impact is based on some wrong conclusions then it is important to point that out. I would say it is ethically the right thing to do.
A related comment. If the paper is old, chances are that someone else has tried to replicate the experiments or the conclusions. So far no one has been able to find anything wrong? It is possible that even with their mistake their conclusions turned out to be correct...
There was a famous case in biology a few years ago in which a paper was retracted six years after it was first published. The decision to retract was taken by the PLOS Pathology editors, not the original authors, who would have preferred to update the original paper with an erratum.
In addition to the excellent suggestions above, I'd also suggest blogging about it. A recent study found that corrections to the literature were 8x as likely to occur if blogged about, as opposed to corrections that had gone the traditional route (contacting editors, authors, etc).
Very interesting; the web is so frightening!
In this case I would say the web is a good thing. It means wrongdoers cannot hide because everyone will know what they did anyway. Well, the problem would be when there are false accusations...
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.089228 | 2014-09-30T14:34:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/29219",
"authors": [
"Ashley Zentz",
"Astronome",
"Benoît Kloeckner",
"Cape Code",
"D.W.",
"Gaurav",
"I Heart Beats",
"Jeyatharsini",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Nelson Wambuhi",
"O_o",
"dany",
"ddiez",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21435",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22382",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22408",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/60",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/705",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80059",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80060",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80068",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80069",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80070",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80112",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/946",
"twoblackboxes",
"user234461"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
34831 | What should I include as "evidence of effective teaching methods?"
I'm in literature and applying for a tenure-track position.
One of my job applications is asking for "evidence of effective teaching methods" as one of the documents I am to submit.
Does anyone have any idea of what this should be?
Research to date has given me very little. My usual go-to sources for job application information and help have not had anything to address this sort of thing.
Sure, there are teaching philosophies and teaching statements, both of which I've written in the past.
Evidence of teaching ability, in my field at least, includes your teaching evaluations and letters, your teaching philosophy, and a few syllabi relevant to the job search at hand. But, there is no clear-cut answer to that one either. And it varies a lot, depending on who you ask.
As for my own pedagogical experience, I would imagine this could include some sample assignments? Perhaps a narrative of what innovative teaching methods I've used in the past, perhaps some student comments from evaluations that speak to methodology in particular?
But, I'm really guessing here, and I was hoping someone who has dealt with this particular item in job applications would have some idea of what this might be.
Thanks for the suggestions on how to clarify the question.
These kinds of requirements are typically written very broadly so that the search committee can use its judgement in determining who the best qualified candidates are. I would provide teaching evaluations, sample syllabi, and a statement of teaching philosophy.
So, in essence, no different from Evidence of Teaching Ability?
@Pupahava: The two seem synonymous to me (although I am an engineer and do not work in the humanities). Also, I've edited the title of the question to better reflect the content.
From the perspective of someone who has been on a search committee this would normally mean your teaching evaluations -- either as a TA or as the instructor on record. Any teaching awards you might have won in this regard would also count
But we also recognize that not everyone has had TA/IOR experience. So it could also include:
Evidence of having taken teacher training / professionalization seminars
Sample syllabi and assignments
Student/faculty/participant feedback from guest lectures and guest talks
This question is deliberately broadly worded so as to not exclude people who haven't had to teach. You can include a cover sheet to this item category (i.e., when you upload your PDFs you include or prepend a cover sheet) that notes how you have interpreted this and let the committee know that you are willing to send more material if requested.
Why is this material requested? After the search committee makes its decision, your file goes to the Provost's office. The Provost will want to see "evidence of teaching effectiveness" as well as "evidence of research" as part of the portfolio. It's simpler for the committee if you can make this case for them ahead of time.
I'm also guessing that this is not for an R1 since we're not really that interested in good teaching . But when I was applying to SLACs, they were very interested in teaching effectiveness and evidence of such.
That's right. Not an R1 school.
Here's a follow up question: This is a literature job. I have teaching experience in language instruction. Should I include those evaluations in this document?
Whatever strengthens your application.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.090028 | 2014-12-26T18:15:48 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34831",
"authors": [
"Brian Borchers",
"Pupahava",
"RoboKaren",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23089",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
43760 | Reapplying for a PhD with a Master's degree
I am a senior undergrad studying internationally and majoring in electronics. I applied to graduate physics programs in the US. I was able to get into some schools, but not the top ones. I have accepted the offer from University of Minnesota for the PhD along with a Master's.
However, I got a few great positions in the upcoming summer and a couple of papers which seem to be completely deal breaking. I also have a feeling that my undergrad major might have been a problem so getting a master's could be helpful.
I wanted to reapply for grad school with my Master's (along with good GPA). There is a lot of negativity in academia about transfer students. However, I want to make it absolutely clear that I am not talking about transfer student. I want to reapply as a first-year graduate student. And, I am also not bothered by getting recommendation letters from UMN. I can get sufficient letters from other professors.
I contacted a few schools asking about it. They said I can obviously reapply as a first-year graduate student (that's what I want). But many people (on the internet) say that it is something that is highly frowned upon, and this decreases the chances of admission (even with Masters). I want to get some perspective as to what extent is it common, and how much is it frowned upon?
Hi, and welcome to Academia.SE! Can you explain a bit more about why you want to take such a radical action? University of Minnesota may not be MIT or CalTech, but it's still a very good graduate school for physics. I'm assuming, BTW, that you don't really mean "freshman," which generally refers only to undergraduate.
Yeah sure....First of all Freshman refers to grad school freshman. May be I am a little worried about my opportunities. I feel like I screwed up my grad applications. Stanford and Berkeley told me that I was rejected because of my "SOP". I want to rectify that. I just feel that I may deserve a little better.
What is your goal for grad school? Do you want an academic career, or are you doing Ph.D. and out to industry, or something else entirely?
I want to go into academia.
Given that the statement of purpose is largely bs, to hear that you were rejected for that makes me sad. But I agree with @jakebeal that, location aside, Minnesota is a very good school.
@gnometorule I have some colleagues who would take severe issue with that statement about location... :-)
Applying to another program without letters from Minnesota profs will probably look very bad.
@Potato I agree. May be if I go there and do well in few advanced courses, one of the Profs may give reco. Moreover UMN does have a terminal Masters program, but I am a part of Masters en route Phd. So, I am guessing many students would go to other univ. after their masters.
Since you, in part, ask how much this type of thing is frowned upon, I can provide a data point (or at least an anecdote). For the purposes of this question/answer I am going to pretend there is an absolute ranking of all U.S. PhD programs in my area (since you are concerned about moving to a "top" school).
The first PhD program I entered was one that does not even appear on the listed of schools that I typically see ranked by various reports. So let's say for my absolute ranking of grad schools that my first program was ranked not even in the top 100.
After a year (or 1.5 years) in this first program, I decided I did not want to get my PhD from there, so I applied to other schools. In the statement that I gave my advisor to help him write me a letter of recommendation, I included 2 reasons that I wanted to leave, which were basically the following
The program I was in did not match my interests. Basically the department was more applied-oriented (almost exclusively so) than I wanted to be.
I basically said that I wasn't a great undergraduate and that now that I had some successful grad courses under my belt, I wanted to re-apply to grad school and get to a better school.
After reading this statement, my advisor said almost verbatim,
"Please tell me you have not shown this to anyone else. You can't show this to anyone else without removing [item 2. from above]."
The major moral here is that there are reasons for switching PhD programs that will be perceived as legitimate, but prestige may not be one of them. I came from a liberal arts background with not much knowledge of the different types of research, and learned after a year in grad school that I was not in a location that would support my research interests. This is perfectly reasonable (in my opinion), and it was also plausible, given the department I was in.
I don't know anything about your field, but I imagine that if you enter a rather top-notch* program like Minnesota and then want to go to a different school to somehow start your actual PhD, I think you will cartainly have to explain your reasons for switching.
You want to go to the higher-ranked school for prestige? Probably this reason will not be well received.
You couldn't find a match for any of your research interests in Minnesota's department? Well, Minnesota is a great department that many tenure-track seeking new PhD's would love to work in. If you can't be a successful researcher there, what kind of researcher are you?
Of course I'm inventing the answers to these questions, and there are many reason's one might switch grad schools. But the point is that you should have a good (by some measure) reason for switching grad programs. If such a reason exists, I think there is nothing negative about changing programs, and I doubt getting into your second program will be more difficult with your Minnesota Masters degree.
*I'm assuming this department is perceived as top-notch based only on jakebeal's comment to the question.
"Great answer" comments are discouraged, but this is such a thoughtful answer. :) Welcome to academia stackexchange!
Thanks for ur reply. I agree that recommendation can be bit tricky. But like I said, I don't need reco from UMN profs. I am not sure if this will be against me or not.
@user33283, not having a recommendation from anyone in your current program will almost certainly be bad for your application.
Question: Why is reason 2 so frowned upon? Every single student I know (I am a student, also) want to go to the best possible school. What's wrong with that?
If you want to be in academia, you are making a mistake of treating graduate school as the end of your academic career, rather than the start. Getting into a really good school is all you need at this point: there are professors who are just as world-class at a place like University of Minnesota as there are at MIT or CalTech, just less of them or in more focused sub-disciplines.
Your goal now should be to have a damned good graduate school career in the school where you are accepted (which, again, is a very good school and highly selective), and eventually line yourself up for the best postdoc that you can get. In Physics, as in many other disciplines, you are expected to do a significant amount of postdoctoral work: postdocs come from all over, and it is the work you do as a postdoc that will have the most effect on your application for faculty positions.
So: don't waste your time now trying to optimize the wrong phase of your career. Buckle down, do some excellent graduate work, and line yourself up for the right next step.
Thanks for the insight. But still, the question is unanswered. I wanted to know if this is possible and how rare or common is it ?
@user33283 Sure, it's possible, but it's pretty rare, partly because it's a bad idea.
I guess I'm out of the loop. I knew a handful of PhD students in grad school at the University of Texas who had gotten their Master's degree elsewhere first. There was no shame in it, but they also didn't start completely over. They came in having done their Master's, had the vast majority of their coursework requirements waived, prepped for their qualifying exams, took them, and then went straight into research. Some of them took several classes along the way to catch things they had missed, learn some exciting things, interact with eminent professors, etc. They did fine. It's not that uncommon to take a Master's at one US university and then a PhD at another. But, there's no need to completely reboot your career to do it.
Thanks so much Bill. Its good to hear that. May I ask, those students at U. Texas, Which major did they belong to ?
The primary one's I was thinking of were in a computational and applied math major which has since changed its name but is still run by the Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences. There might also have been an Aerospace Engineer or two (which was my major).
I can't speak to physics, but in my field the master's you receive on your way to a Ph.D. is not equivalent to a standalone master's---and coming from a school with (primarily) a nonterminal master's program is often viewed as "couldn't cut it for the Ph.D." I'm under the impression from the original question that this is the sort of master's she'd be pursuing. I mention it because your answer is a little unclear regarding what sort of master's degrees you're talking about.
@kyle, exactly. UMN does have a terminal master program. But I am a part of masters en route Phd. I am afraid, I may be looked down bcoz of that.
@user33283, I think that admissions committees can tell the difference between those who couldn't hack it in a PhD program and those who could. Those who can't hack it don't apply from a lower-ranked school to a higher one. If you get admitted to MIT after a year and a half at UMN, who cares what other people think about your time at MIT? If you're really concerned about the perception, switch to UMN's terminal master's now.
JFK said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." User33283, don't be a snobbish leech. Don't turn down the meatballs before trying one, just because you think the Angus steak is more prestigious.
Go into your new school with the best possible attitude you can: you are a smart, curious, thoughtful, hardworking person; the school you will be attending has a great deal to offer; if you come across a professor there that doesn't appeal to you, just steer clear of that person; and gravitate to the people you find stimulating, helpful, ethical; etc.
If the school turns out not to be the right fit, despite your best efforts, then you'll have your reasons to move elsewhere. And you'll have your recent recommendations (which WILL be needed, as @Potato pointed out).
Now, here's a point that will help you swallow the above: if Minnesota is not among the top-ranked schools, then you'll be able to be a big fish in a medium pond!
Just make sure you're a big fish with integrity.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.090327 | 2015-04-17T12:07:30 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43760",
"authors": [
"Angga Dwiartama",
"Ant",
"Bill Barth",
"Cristina Roman",
"Mathengie",
"Nat",
"Potato",
"Rajiv",
"SternK",
"Tanessa Stokley",
"VB Hans",
"gnometorule",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118724",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118726",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118736",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118737",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118740",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118741",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118749",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118760",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118860",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15995",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33283",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4384",
"jakebeal",
"kyle",
"user16316",
"user33283",
"vectory"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
101698 | Advisor pushing for dead end topics
I am new to this forum. I am encountering a problem in my doctoral studies that I haven't been able to find in an existing thread so I wanted to ask here. Any advice on how to navigate this would be very welcome.
I'm 2.5 years into my doctoral studies (geography) working under two co-advisors. Their areas of expertise broadly overlap with my dissertation topic, but the topic is my own, and I know the study area better than both of them. One advisor has been pressing for me to conduct a certain methods for social data collection that I knew wouldn't work (research fatigue is high in this area, distrust towards scientists without existing connections in these communities is a huge - if not insurmountable - obstacle). I tried to explain that these issues would make this type of social data collection very hard to pull off. I suppose I failed at this communication, because he pressed for this method all the same (with the rebuttal "science is hard"). Because he's an advisor I assumed he knew something I didn't, and I wrote up a dissertation proposal with this approach being used to answer one of my research questions (in my program a "dissertation" consists of three publication-ready papers). I emailed a few groups engaged in work in these communities. The reply I got was what I expected: they strongly advised against attempting to collect household surveys for the reasons I had tried to explain to my advisor before. I just got this reply today, I have not yet discussed it with my advisors.
This does not sink my entire research proposal necessarily, but only a portion of it. There are other methods of data collection and analysis I'm still working on to answer the other research questions. Furthermore I spoke to my other co-advisor earlier in the fall (not a social scientist) asking what my recourse is if the social data collection component falls through for the reasons I feared. I was told not to worry necessarily, that we could figure out a way to work around it.
That being said, I'm still worried. I'm worried that the advisor who pushed for the an approach that was ultimately dead-on-arrival doesn't fully understand my research. He's suggested approaches in the past that have turned out to be dead ends too. I'm also worried that I wasn't able to recognize this as a problem until I am 2.5 years into my program. The heavy initial course-load (full graduate course-load for the first two years) and first few research dead ends had me seeing the individual trees, not the forest. I'm sure a lot of this is my fault; I should have communicated better, I should have been more clear on what the expectations were. But now that I'm waking up to the fact that this is a problem, I'm not sure what to do about it. I have (excuse the lack of modesty) a good topic, and I think there's still a lot of value in seeing it through. I suppose I will have a better idea of what to do about this when we all meet next week, but an outsider perspective would be really valuable to me right now.
Thank you in advance
It would help to clarify roughly where you are (particularly US vs Europe) and how long you expect your PhD to take ( / have funding for). In the UK, at least in most physical sciences I know, you'd be expected to be wrapping up or well on your way by the 2.5 year mark, but obviously Academia is a varied place. With that in mind, having more information about how much breathing room your timeline has will help get you answers that are more useful.
More of an interpersonal answer, but if told "you should do X", a direct dismissal, e.g. "that won't work because of Y", could very well make them defensive and harder to convince. Phrasing your objection as questions, e.g. "wouldn't Y be a problem?" or "how would we solve problem Y?", is more likely to be well-received and lead to them seeing things your way.
I've read this twice and still can't find a question anywhere. What's the actual problem to solve here?
@pipe how should op respond to professor, given that research proposal is DOA
One piece of useful advice my thesis supervisors gave me was:
We're going to throw a lot of ideas at you. You need to figure out which ones are worthwhile and which ones aren't.
If you know that something isn't going to work, then you need to figure out how to communicate to your advisor that it's not feasible. If you've tried and didn't succeed in making your case, try again using a different means of communication. Remember that the ability to make a convincing argument is crucial to success in research.
If I may elaborate on the last sentence: either there are objective reasons why it is a dead end, then you should identify them and use them in your argumentation; either there are none, and maybe your advisor is right.
How would OP respond if his/her adviser is adamant on a dead end? Stand his/her ground?
@FrankFYC If the advisor is insistent, then do enough work to show the approach won’t work, while making progress on other fronts.
@aeismail but at the end of the day, the final decision is OP's correct?
A few (hopefully) practical measures:
Talk to your co-advisor about this, asking him to accept your position and, assuming he has, to call for a three-way discussion of this matter.
This is not always possible, but if you can - schedule the dead-end work last, i.e. after other endeavors about whose success you're more certain. Why do this? More opportunities to change the advisor's mind; time for him to learn to better value your judgment; or perhaps even time for you to theoretically reconsider your opinion.
Regrading your "failure at communication" I: Write up your objection - Write either a methodological survey paper, or something less formal such as a blog post, arguing the shortcomings/dead-endedness of the collection method.
Regrading your "failure at communication" II: It sounds like you feel ashamed/afraid/embarrassed to bring up the subject again with your advisor after it was supposedly settled. Try to accept the danger of appearing foolish/obstinate etc. and have another go at convincing your advisor, being better prepared for it, perhaps with material you can pull from some folder you've compiled etc.
Consider whether you can't do research on the failing methodology. You could employ both collection method A (the poor one you disapprove of) and collection method B (a better one), documenting your preparations for both and the process of collection, more closely than you would do when interested in just the results. Then, besides a paper about the actual subject matter, you could write a methodological paper about the comparative failings of the method you disapprove of. In other words, make lemonade from the lemons.
Consult your advisor's other graduate students, current or former, about this matter. Maybe they've had similar issues and can share their experience of how they handled it. Hey, maybe one of them has had the exact same issue regarding data collection, which would help you even more.
It goes without saying you shouldn't try all of these at the same time (but some of these do fit well together).
Not all advisors are up to the task, and sometimes they are wrong. I've personally encountered situations where advisors were wrong and guided (or misguided) their students down a failing path. Depending on your university, and your financial situation (are you beholden to a particular advisor for your grant funding?) it might be necessary to find another advisor. You indicated you already have two, perhaps a 3rd?
That said, remember your goal is to get the PhD. Share this feedback from the outside groups with both of your advisors and discuss it with them. I'd start first with the one more likely to agree with you, then the other. If he/she still insists, then politely toss the ball into their court: "Professor, I don't understand how this (survey stuff) is going to work given the limited time and resources, can you please show me how we can do this." I used "we" on purpose - it draws them in as a collaborator not an opponent in an argument.
Part of the PhD process is learning how to manage people, your advisors in this case.
Also consider the possibility your advisor is correct. It's not easy for the student to call out the master, and you have to be pretty darn sure if you do. If the advisor is wrong, find a way for him/her to gracefully back down rather than challenging them directly.
Been there, done that.
Some further practical points in addition to @einpoklum's answer, in particular the advise of having another go at convincing the advisor (and too long for a comment)
Directly trying to convince your advisor (who is convinced of the opposite) may just result in more communication chaos. So instead, I'd
ask the advisor for an appointment to discuss (again) the choice of method: Ask the supervisor to let you first present your point of view so that once they know your understanding of the situation they can convince you of their point of view.
present your arguments
keep in mind that practical arguments are not necessarily scientific arguments. IMHO, they should be marked as such and then practicality considered separately from scientific arguments*.
Practical arguments against doing something share the disadvangate for you with negative results that there's always the latent question lurking of you being lazy or not good enough. So make sure your presentation of arguments will not look as trying to avoid hard work.
Now listen to their arguments.
Actually, you should also prepare a list with the advantages of the method. Doing this in preparation for the discussion would put you into a much stronger position, and it is actually an important working technique to be able to identify advantages of methods you dislike. Take the role of the Devil's Advocate.
The important point for the discussion with your advisor is: you need to be willing to be convinced! Be curious how they come to the opposite conclusion you came to.
Otherwise, no communication to solve the scientific/practical problem can happen.
* I have in mind several situations where computational feasibility was a question. I found that quantifying the effort goes a long way: computation time of 1 h (single occasion) may be unpleasant in an interactive session, but is certainly feasible in general. A final calculation taking a couple of months on a desktop computer would IMHO be quite inside what can be expected for a PhD thesis (I mostly deal with calculations where a "sneak preview" will give you a rough idea what is going on and then lots of computational effort goes into refining the results). So would be a couple of months of unpleasant final data collection given that pilot experiments/a small pilot survey shows that this is actually the way to go with the data collection. Whereas a computation that would take several years of Rosetta@home would clearly be outside a single PhD thesis and there would be no discussion whether this is feasible or not.
Building on cbeleites’s answer - ask for a couple of recent examples relevant to your work where your advisor’s approach was used to good effect.
It may be that your advisor has more insight on how to do this properly, and you can learn something from the examples. In that case, your advisor would likely be able to rattle off a few references off the top of his head. Studying those examples should give you some idea of how to do what your advisor is advising (which, incidentally, may not be exactly what you’re objecting to).
On the other hand, it may be that your advisor is too busy / is distracted / etc, and makes the same suggestion to all his students. In that case, it might be harder for him to come up with relevant positive examples, and you can then suggest a few relevant positive examples you’ve found that follow your preferred methodology. (Naturally, you’ll have to do some work to find those examples first.)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.091176 | 2018-01-06T18:46:23 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/101698",
"authors": [
"Bluebird",
"E.P.",
"NotThatGuy",
"aeismail",
"anderstood",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24157",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38012",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53536",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77932",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/820",
"pipe"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
8169 | Having a low tier publication as an undergraduate student?
Is it a good thing for an undergraduate student to publish in a low-tier conference as first author? Or should the student avoid such places and only publish in at least reputable places? If it is a good thing, how should the student present his study in the graduate admissions process to admissions members (since the conference name is mostly unknown to much of them)?
Note that, by low tier, I mean the conferences which are ranked at "C level" according to ERA (Excellence in Research for Australia).
"low-tier" is not the opposite of "at least reputable".
Let me answer the important parts of your question:
Is a good thing for an undergraduate student to publish in a low-tier conference as first author ? Or should the student avoid from such places and only publish in at least reputable places ?
Yes, especially if the venue is peer-reviewed.
As the answers to this question suggest, graduate schools look for evidence of research potential. The undergraduate research experience is about developing some basic skills and demonstrating that you are capable of handling a research project. Publishing at a third-tier conference, so long as there is some level of peer review, is better than no publications. Would publishing at a higher tier conference be better? Sure, but it might not be worth the effort or the risk of rejection. Publishing at a third-tier conference would look better than being rejected from a first-tier conference. Being first author on a paper at a lower tier conference should hold more weight than being a middle author on a paper at a higher-ranked conference.
Your research adviser probably has some wisdom about the level of conference at which your work should be presented. Choosing a lower tier conference is not about making your work seem less important. The choice might be about guaranteeing you get the change to present it at all.
If it is a good thing, how should the student present his study in graduate admissions process to admissions members, since the conference name is mostly unknown to much of them?
Present your work and conference presentation the same way you would present any other similar experiences. If you have to provide a personal statement as part of your application, write about the experience and how it benefited you. If they ask for a list of relevant accomplishments, include this presentation in that list. Put it in on your resumé. Ask your research adviser for a letter of recommendation.
Do not use any negative language or derogatory language when describing your experience. For example, don't mention that the conference is lower tier or that you thought you could have presented at a better one. If the admissions committee knows about the conference, then they already know about its ranking. If they do not, then you should not be the one to give any hint that you think your experience might have been sub-par.
Just to add to extensive Ben Norris's answer - as far as I know, ERA has been discontinued, but, Brazilian CS community did a conference ranking for their internal evaluation purposes. Here is the list (explanations are in Portuguese, but the names of the conferences are from all over the world) - http://www.capes.gov.br/images/stories/download/avaliacao/Comunicado_004_2012_Ciencia_da_Computacao.pdf, A1 is the best, B5 is worse - that is essentially based on h-index of a conference computed via this tool: http://shine.icomp.ufam.edu.br/index.php
May be the conference where you published is of better position there:)? There are also several community-driven rankings but I cannot post links to them as my reputation is not enough for posting more than 2 links;)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.092447 | 2013-02-24T10:34:34 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8169",
"authors": [
"August",
"Christina Masden",
"JeffE",
"Shankar Natarajan",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19737",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19738",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19739",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19743",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"user51946"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
137579 | Submission changed to a different status, but with the same explanation as the previous status
(this line is added later ) : The length of the paper is only 3 pages.
Soon After Submission
Article Status: Reviewing
Your paper is being reviewed by the journal’s editors and you will be contacted as soon as we have news.
After a month changed to
Article Status: Under Review
Your paper is being reviewed by the journal’s editors and you will be contacted as soon as we have news.
See: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55665/what-does-the-typical-workflow-of-a-journal-look-like. These two likely mean editorial assessment and peer review respectively, i.e. in the first case it's the editor checking it, and in the second reviewers have been invited.
Just one note, the status of my paper has been changed from Reviewing to Under Review after three month and now is the Under Review too. I suggest you to wait and concentrate on your next research.
@user0410 : thanks. May I know the journal name? Did the status explanation say editors or peer reviewers?
For your first question, my answer is No. For the second question: My status of paper is the same as your paper. Therefore, please be patient.
Thats a valuble info. Thanks @user0410 . Looks like this status is the normal thing for this journal.
Initial answer: (This answer assumes a regular type of full-length paper submission in the standard journal workflow.) This is probably an error in their explanation of the current status. The explanation is not in line with the typical journal workflow, especially the highlighted part:
Article Status: Under Review
Your paper is being reviewed by the journal’s editors and you will be contacted as soon as we have news.
In the typical journal workflow, the review is performed by the invited reviewers, rather than by the journal's editors.
You may contact the journal to task for clarification, but it probably won't matter in the end, as the process doesn't depend on this (incorrect) explanation.
Updated answer: (This update takes into account that the submission only has three pages, and that the journal uses a decision-making step based on consensus between the editorial board members.) In this case, it's plausible that they're wont be additional reviewers involved. I speculate that the first status refers to the assigned editor handling the paper, and the second status refers to the editorial board making the decision. In this case, the status would not have any implication for the decision, other than removing the possibility of a desk-reject.
In that link (workflow), it is mentioned that, editorial assesment phase also can use the status "under review".
@RajeshDachiraju One particular system does that (and it arguably uses a slightly confusing terminology). However, unlike the system here, it doesn't have two separate status "Reviewing" and "Under review" with the same explanation.
This journal has a voting system by all members of the editorial board to make a decision. Can it be related to this?
@RajeshDachiraju Could be, even though this kind of decision process seems rather nonstandard in the first place. To be honest, in combination, these nonstandard procedures and erroneous/misleading descriptions don't cast the best possible light on the journal.
Its fairly reputed. Moreover the paper submitted is only of 3 pages. Would that cast any more light.
@RajeshDachiraju That is fairly relevant context. In this case (which is rather exceptional), it's plausible that they're wont be additional reviewers involved.
In that case, which makes sense, whats the need of a status change?
Do you also mean/think its going to be a rejection for sure?
@RajeshDachiraju I speculate that the first status refers to the assigned editor handling the paper, and the second status refers to the editorial board making the decision. In this case, the status would not have any implication for the decision, other than removing the possibility of a desk-reject.
a small mistake, its not voting but consensus.
Could you edit your answer in the new context?
@RajeshDachiraju Done
It means that your paper is being reviewed by the journal's editors, and you will be contacted as soon as they have news.
...
What kind of answer were you expecting?
I know that. What Iam asking is what is the indication of that change in the status when they both convey same meaning?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.092762 | 2019-09-25T06:46:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/137579",
"authors": [
"Allure",
"Rajesh D",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1015",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/102756",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"lighthouse keeper",
"user0410"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
29244 | Is it appropriate to ask a professor via e-mail for a letter of recommendation?
I have been out of school since May now, and I am considering applying for graduate school. I currently live nowhere near the university I attended.
Would it be appropriate for me to ask for a letter of recommendation via e-mail? If not, what would be the best option?
[Suggestions as to how I should approach such a communication would be appreciated as well.]
I don't see why not, but we can always entertain the possible outcomes. Scenario 1 - It is appropriate. Professor has no issues. Scenario 2 - It is inappropriate. Professor emails you back a stinging rebuke remarking on your poor etiquette and demands that a formal request be penned in black ink and sealed with a red stamp featuring your family crest. Alternatively, if you have his number, you can call him.
Yes, of course it is appropriate. Why wouldn't it be?
@JukkaSuomela - I ask since a particular friend of mine says to request in-person, which I would do, but it's not possible currently.
If you're on-campus, then it doesn't hurt since the professor can put a face to a name, but realistically speaking, if your professor can remember who you are by name and face without seeing you, the email is fine.
In-person requests are always the best route, because you can gauge willingness and eagerness to write the letters much more directly than via telephone or email.
However, if you can't be there, because you've moved away, then it is of course appropriate to ask for letters by email. Whether or not the professor will grant the request or not is of course a question. However, I would mention that you've moved (and where you currently are) as part of your request, so that the professor knows why you're not able to come in for a meeting if asked.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.093104 | 2014-09-30T20:31:10 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/29244",
"authors": [
"Clarinetist",
"Compass",
"Jukka Suomela",
"Masudul Quraishi",
"Varun",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17476",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22013",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80139",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80141",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80143",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80144",
"oscarechobravo",
"user3419772",
"厦门办证"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
98348 | Can I work on old manuscripts using personal time?
I submitted few manuscripts to some journals during my PhD and moved to other institute for postdoc (full-time) in few months before. Now one manuscript has come for revision and other manuscripts may come soon. I have following many questions in my mind.
I am wondering is it ethical to spend some time to make revision of my old manuscripts in holidays/weekends in my house without using any resources from Institute?
Should I need to discuss this matter to my present supervisor or Institute?
Should I acknowledge my present Institute? Is it also necessary to change my affiliation?
In addition to what's been said in the answers very few supervisors will mind you spending a little time during the working day on it, especially for things like communicating with your old group while they're in work.
What ethics do you feel are being challenged here?
I expect the post-docs in my group to spend time finishing up manuscripts from their graduate work, with their affiliation that of their university (with a 'current address' footnote). In return, I expect them to spend time on their next job finishing up manuscripts from the post-doc. I suspect your current advisor would like all their manuscripts treated as such.
Let's address your questions one by one.
I am wondering is it ethical to spend some time to make revision of my old manuscripts in holidays/weekends in my house without using any resources from Institute?
What you do on your free time is entirely up to you: no job, boss, or conditions, can take that away from you...
(Well, almost… as noted in comments, there can be clauses that limit your abilities to work on other projects, but I would think that the principal case in which it causes problem / conflicts of interest, is when that "side activity" is paid, which, I assume, is not your case.)
Should I need to discuss this matter to my present supervisor or Institute?
...yet, depending on the sensibilities and particular conditions of your employment, you may want to tell your supervisor. You don't have to make it super formal, as it is rather usual for a young post-doc to have ongoing work that follows publications made during the Ph.D. Just mention that you'll be working on some revisions on your free time, and that should be fine.
If your supervisor shows interest ("Great, you should make a presentation", "Tell me more", "What are the connections with our current project?"), you can try to make fruitful connections, but that may not arise.
Should I acknowledge my present Institute? Is it also necessary to change my affiliation?
I would think that this will depends on the country, institute, kind of supervisor, and many other aspects. Listing your former institution as the "main institute", and your current institute as your current address would probably be the safest option.
If the work was performed without resources of the new job, then the best way to address the affiliation is to use the old affiliation, and list the new address as a "Present address"-type footnote. Most journals routinely allow this.
I would acknowledge the institution where the majority of the work was carried out, unless significant reworking was needed and this was done during 'work time' at a different workplace.
"What you do on your free time is entirely up to you: no job, boss, or conditions, can take that away from you...". I don't think that's correct, or at least not universally. Most work contracts (and in some cases even legislation) include implicit or explicit non-compete clauses.
@jcaron Yeah, was thinking about the same thing. In general a lot of those non compete clauses are unenforcable for the most part in most places around the world, but a contract can definitely limit what you can do in your free time.
@jcaron Good point. I edited my answer. I would think that non-complete clauses involves paid activities, but this might not universal either.
In many employments, one thing that's done at the time which the contract/in-processing is signed/done is list prior work which is not yet public/protected (i.e. published, patented, etc.). This is done to protect your rights to the work (i.e. exclude it from any rights which you are assigning to your employer). Often, you can list on-going projects/papers/ideas/etc. Depending on the jurisdiction/contract, the employer could end up having an interest in anything not explicitly disclosed. What happens varies greatly based on the jurisdiction/contract. Consult a lawyer if you want advice.
This is one of those things about academia that likely varies across disciplines. The answer below pertains to norms in mathematics. (It might help if you provide more information about your discipline so people can give more accurate answers.)
In mathematics it is customary to sign any paper you write while employed at institution X as "[name of author], Institution X". The distinction between "personal time" and "work time" is essentially nonexistent in the context of paper authorship, nor is there any discussion of the physical location where the paper was written or whether work "resources" were used.
In your situation, as I said I would sign the paper with my name and current affiliation, and add in the acknowledgements a note along the lines of "Part of this work was done while the author was at Institution Y", where Y is the name of my old institution.
As for discussing your plans with your supervisor, yes, in mathematics it would be expected that you discuss such projects with them, at least to the same extent that they would generally expect you to discuss with them what you are working on (which is not necessarily a very high extent - postdoctoral researchers in mathematics are generally pretty free to work on what they want and there isn't a high expectation on the part of the supervisor that the researcher spend all their time on things that are directly useful to the supervisor). Again, the fact that the projects are continuations of things you started elsewhere or that you plan to work on them during time that you consider as "personal time" is immaterial to the question.
If you do the revisions entirely in your free time without resources from your current job, then your official address should be the institute where you did the Ph.D. work. Your new address would be indicated as "current address." It would not be absolutely necessary to discuss the matter with your current supervisor, but it would be polite to do so.
If, on the other hand, you use work time or resources from your current job, then you should get your current supervisor's approval. I can't imagine a reasonable supervisor denying you this approval unless the revisions were so extensive and your work on your current project so urgent that you just can't spare any work time for the revisions. Assuming you get your supervisor's permission, you should either list your current institute as a second address (if the revisions were quite extensive, so that a substantial part of the paper resulted from work at your new address) or put a footnote on the first page indicating what part of the work was done at the new address (if that part was not so extensive).
I should add that I'm answering from the point of view of a mathematician in the U.S. (except for the part about "your work on your current project is so urgent ..." which is extremely unlikely in mathematics but can easily occur in a lab science where you're the one who keeps the lab functioning). Other fields and other countries might have different ideas of what's appropriate.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.093325 | 2017-11-03T02:31:39 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98348",
"authors": [
"Chris H",
"Clément",
"David Mulder",
"Jon Custer",
"Makyen",
"Strawberry",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11353",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19627",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22966",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36309",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43239",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57981",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8494",
"jcaron",
"thomasfedb"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
95870 | Co-authors are not responding due to their very very busy schedule, How should I handle it?
I prepared a manuscript along with two co-authors and submitted the manuscript to a journal in January 2016. However, the manuscript was rejected in April 2016 and given another chance to resubmit after addressing the reviewers' comments.
I did all the revisions and submitted to my co-authors since August 2016 to check the revision. But none of the co-authors have responded to my emails, even after seven or eight gentle reminders at regular intervals. As both of them are top-level professors at very reputable institutes and heads of their department, so I understand their very busy schedule.
How should I handle this situation?
I found another question similar to mine: How to handle Co-author who is not listening the suggestions to improve the paper quality, but I did not find my answer there.
My approach to this kind of situations is the following: set a deadline, send a reminder a few days before the deadline, resubmit. That's it.
@MassimoOrtolano And soon, the co-authors will say that you submitted a paper without their approval. You should always get everyone's approval before submitting, especially after major changes have been done (i.e. everything that exceed spell checking).
@Mark It's hever happened. When I set the deadline I state clearly that if I don't get feedback for that date, I'll assume that they agree. If they don't, and they don't answer, too bad for them. In all the collaborations I've been part of, this was usually the expected behaviour from the first author.
Ask them if they'd like their names removed from the manuscript. I'll bet you'll hear back promptly.
Related post: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14146/what-do-i-do-when-a-co-author-takes-too-long-to-give-feedback-during-the-peer-re
In general, you are the lead author. If you are keen to progress a paper, then you need take the lead. This may mean that you wont get as much feedback from your co-authors as you might want. But this is generally better than delaying a publication for months and months. I also find there is a real cost in having to get back in the zone on a paper that I'm leading when it is put on hold because of such issues.
I would typically give co-authors a specific timeframe to make a contribution. For example, I might say that I am going to submit the paper in four weeks, and thus, any feedback they can provide in the next two weeks would be most welcome. I'd also try to get feedback from them about when they might have time to have a look at it, and I'd try to arrange my own schedule for working on the paper so that I'm able to send something through for when they might be free.
Of course, this is something to be negotiated. Sometimes, co-authors may want or expect to have greater involvement. Or you may think that their input is worth waiting for.
The case where a student is the lead author is also another variant. In that case, the supervisor would have more influence over timelines. In this case, the student may also be relying on the supervisor more to make sure that the manuscript is ready for submission.
What about co-author consent? Nate Eldredge raised the following issue in comments:
Don't you need the consent of all co-authors in order to submit a paper? So if they don't respond by your deadline, I don't see how you can ethically go ahead and submit anyway.
I agree that co-authors need to consent to having their name listed on a paper. That is very important. And you can imagine situations where consent would be an issue.
However, from my experience, in many situations the consent is implied. First, co-authors have usually already agreed to be involved in a publication at the start of the project. And in the above case, the co-authors have already submitted a paper and now they are revising it to submit it again. It's common for one author to take the lead on these kinds of revisions.
Then in the usual case, the lead author will send emails to co-authors outlining a publication plan with a timeline as well as follow-up emails as it gets closer to submission. The lead author would also send emails about when a submission occurs and when the status of the manuscript changes. At every stage, co-authors are free to negotiate the timeline, their input, and whether they wish to remain a co-author.
In most cases, co-authors respond to emails. Busy co-authors may not have time to actually make a contribution to the paper at that time, but any reasonable co-author will reply to emails in a reasonable time at least indicating their intentions about the paper (or they should have an auto-reply to say they are on leave). Furthermore, a submission is not the final word on authorship. For example, if a co-author didn't respond to emails for four weeks and then finds out their name was put on a submission that they did not approve of, there will still usually be plenty of time to withdraw their name, or make sufficient changes at the revisions stage.
So, I think if the lead author engages in reasonable correspondence about the publication plan and the submission process, then the issue can be navigated.
Don't you need the consent of all co-authors in order to submit a paper? So if they don't respond by your deadline, I don't see how you can ethically go ahead and submit anyway.
@NateEldredge see response.
@NateEldredge As I said in another comment, e.g., I set a deadline and I state that I'll assume consent if I don't get feedback. This was quite common in all the collaborations I've been part of.
Especially after the first submission, it feels much more kosher to give a deadline for a revision (i.e. they've already approved the majority of the paper).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.093918 | 2017-09-13T03:10:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/95870",
"authors": [
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"HEITZ",
"Jeromy Anglim",
"Mark",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Nate Eldredge",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52490",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75255"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
102529 | Rehearse or memorise to improve my presentations?
This may be a dumb question. I would like to improve my presentation skills.
So should I rehearse my presentation at least 5-10-20 times? Or should I memorise my presentation and practice it enough?
When rehearsing, I make my presentation in front of a mirror and observe that I deliver the same messages in a different way in each time, while if I memorise what to say for each slide of my presentation, then I deliver the same messages in same way very confidently each time I practice in front of a mirror.
So I am getting confused which one is the better method to deliver an effective presentation?
You should use whatever method works for you. That method will most likely change over time. Personally, I prefer hearing presentations that are rehearsed, rather than memorised.
Have you seen https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17984/how-to-do-a-flawless-and-natural-presentation?rq=1?
The best are presentations based on understanding : these can easily change direction due to questions or interest from the audience.
My clues are: don't memorise, don't read from a sheet of paper, rehearse, like 5 times, try to remember a general red thread and speak naturally. Manage your time.
Well, you can get some ideas from at least one guy who was known for being an okay presenter. Whether and to what extent his methods translate to the setting of academia is somewhat debatable.
A further nuance: Practice the first few minutes more often and with a more polished/definitive wording than the remainder of your talk. The first few minutes are special, because you need to grab the audience's attention and make them feel comfortable listening to you. This is the part where you need to project confidence.
There's no right answer here.
I had a colleague who would rehearse her presentation to the point of memorization. (Important detail: this was in the days when transparencies were still used in preference to laptops.) During her presentation, she discovered her slides got messed up in traveling, and had a very hard time recovering from the problem. So the problem with memorization is that you may or may not be able to deal with it if you're thrown off your script somehow.
However, some people get so nervous about the idea of a presentation that they can't handle it without memorizing what they're going to say. The reason why this works for them is that recitation uses a fundamentally different part of your brain than normal conversation. (This is why people who stutter in normal life don't stutter when acting.)
Personally, I try to just have a list of major points for the slides, and then work "with the audience" to get my points across. (For instance, if I'm talking to a room full of chemists, I'll give a different talk than when I'm presenting to an audience of chemical engineers or computational scientists.)
But you just have to experiment and find what works best for you.
It's not "either rehearse or memorize". Also, your sentence "In rehearse, every time I make presentations in front of mirror and observe that I am delivering same messages in a different way in each time." got me thinking that you probably rehearse inefficiently.
The purpose of rehearsal is to improve your presentation. So after every rehearsal you should reflect about your performance, think about points that did not come across right, and about ways to improve the presentation. If you just start over again without reflection and without a new, improved plan, you do a weird mix of "not really rehearsing" and "not really memorizing".
I'd say, a good rehearsal includes quite some memorization for the crucial parts. However, if you rehearse long enough, you may get to some point where do not even memorize your lines, but where the presentation has a natural flow such that your previously memorized phrases come out naturally.
I'd say, bare memorization is ok, but may be dangerous if you don't know the story line of your presentation as a whole. Imagine that you loose you lines and get stuck in the middle of the presentation. So also rehearse to speak freely but memorize some lines that you find particularly good at crucial points. A good structure of the presentation and a good story is very helpful here (and for a badly structured presentation, neither memorizing nor rehearsal will lead to a good presentation, anyway).
Prepare on your own first and then -- this is the key -- give a practice talk to a small group. Ask a friend to jot down notes from the feedback people give you at the end. Make sure the people you invite to listen to your practice talk know how to give constructive feedback in a supportive way.
If you are fairly inexperienced, you may want to do some rinsing and repeating -- but don't overdo it or the talk will lose its freshness.
I cannot memorise and so would always rehearse. At first I was very nervous and practiced many times, but over the years I learned to care less. These days, I am confident enough in my knowledge of a subject to trust that the slides will queue me to say what is needed to get the message across. Anyhow, I do not know if this applies to you, but I would recommend that you sometimes talk without preparation. The quality of the presentation will suffer and it becomes more difficult to manage your time (so save this for an informal presentation), but it is a liberating experience and I find that it removes most of the stress involved.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.094399 | 2018-01-20T17:36:13 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/102529",
"authors": [
"Dan Romik",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Oleg Lobachev",
"Solar Mike",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72855",
"lighthouse keeper",
"user2768"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
103199 | Going from co-advisors to just one advisor
I'm 2.5 years in to a 4 year PhD with possibility of a 5th year of funding. I started with one advisor, but research interests started shifting, so we brought on a co-advisor. My research interests have continued to shift in the new co-advisor's direction. The research components that the original advisor can guide me on are hitting speed bump after speed bump and never really getting off the ground. I've been making steady progress with the research components of the new advisor. I want to have the "new" co-advisor (not so new by now) just be my main advisor, and have my original advisor just serve as a committee member. Feels like a cold move, seeing as he was the one that brought me on in the first place. But he recently mentioned he's no longer sure how to advise me anymore, so I think he might be thinking the same thing.
I worry I'm too far into my program to make such a move. My comprehensive exams are coming up this semester, which complicates the timing of this as well. I want to suggest this move to my co-advisor in a way that is tactful and won't cause waves. But I'm not sure how to go about it - you can't un-ring a bell.
My questions are:
How unusual is it to go from two advisors to one after 2.5 years, and am I better off making this change or doing the best I can with the situation I'm in?
If making this change is better, do you have any advice with regards to how to do it so that I don't make a mess?
I am not being directly funded by either advisor, like with a grant. Funding comes through university assistantships. Additionally, keeping the original advisor on in a co-supervisory role is not an acceptable solution, because the original advisor is adamant about research approaches that don't work, and - at this point - also fall outside my interests.
I think the optimal answer depends mostly on your situation and university. However, I try to give you some general advice. From what I have seen in your question, you might already be one step to far into the decision. I would rather start an open discussion with your first advisor and express your concern. All further steps, such as switching advisors, can be the outcome of your discussion, but there might be different and better solutions.
It is quite normal that research interests shift after some time into your PhD. Since you are making progress, you see which ideas are working out and which don't. You will get to know new topics and new questions will arise. This will have an influence on your research, of course.
Your advisor seems to see that, too:
But he recently mentioned he's no longer sure how to advise me anymore, so I think he might be thinking the same thing.
By expressing his concern, he already shows some awareness of this issue. You should try to talk to him and find a solution together. I would not approach him like "I want to replace you with advisor Y". This can come across as very rude since this is on a personal level. Start a discussion that focuses on your research. Talk about your concerns that your interest have drifted apart and try to come up with possible solutions. When you are further into discussion you could also include the co-advisor. As already mentioned, switching advisors might be one solution but it might not be the best one.
The more you integrate your advisors into the discussion, the less conflicts I would expect. Do not push your decisions onto them as this could really affect your current position. Talk to them and find a solution together.
I believe you have asked an X-Y question. Or rather, you are tacking an X-Y problem.
You see, it actually doesn't matter who's listed as your advisor. Your actual issue seems to be:
... co-advisor is adamant about research approaches that don't work, and - at this point - also fall outside my interests.
If he were magically removed as a co-advisor, then you will have circumvented this issue. And then you ask yourself "so how do I remove him?"
I'd suggest tackling the actual problem. First, I'd talk with your newer co-advisor about the situation, and see what he suggests. Perhaps he'll offer a meeting of all of you three regarding your progress, at which your older co-advisor would have to convince your newer one; or they might come with an idea you haven't thought of.
Another possible avenue of action is using the fact that your older co-advisor says "he's no longer sure how to advise me anymore". Perhaps he himself realizes that the course of action on which he's been pushing you is not leading somewhere useful? It seems contradictory to insist on your advisee doing certain things but at the same time express doubts about your ability to advise him/her further. You haven't given too many details, but it sounds like there's a sort of a "crack in his defense". @J-Kun's answer makes some pertinent suggestions in this context.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.094920 | 2018-02-03T01:02:07 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/103199",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
51171 | Is It OK for an academic to have broad research interests?
First of all I am a second year M.Sc. Student in Computer science, working on information networks and enjoy my research a lot. In my B.Sc. final Project I had worked on intrusion detection systems, which was actually a computer network protocol related area and irrelevant to my current field.
I should mention that actually I am not frustrated with my current research or topics that I was working during B.Sc. But the problem is that I am also so excited about other nearly irrelevant topics.
For example I have passed about two courses in signal processing and now sometimes I am thinking about continue my PhD in that field. I am also interested in algorithms and CS theory, etc.
I want to know is It OK to have such broad activity in your resume or this can flag me as picky person regard that I finished successfully every project that I had been started and it can be verified in Recommendation Letters and so on.
It may depend on place/discipline. But as a PhD student (in quantum information) people were surprised that I had other interests than my PhD thesis (and that I do know anything at research-level on things not related to my thesis). While surprise was (usually) positive it was telling a lot that it's weird for me to know things from other disciplines (and I felt "not belonging"). And I have feeling that anything by smooth transitions between closely-related fields is looked down (for one being non-serious, shallow, etc) and may harm application chances.
@PiotrMigdal This is how science dies, people digging trenches around their field, and pretending that outside knowledge is useless. The truth is, the broader your knowledge, the better the chance of making new discoveries and connections.
There is nothing wrong in showing interest in various topics, as long as you obtain deep results in at least some of them.
Without having any deep results in some of the fields, it really looks bad, because it looks like that you are unable to advance enough in something to push the topic forward. It more looks like you chicken out of any serious job, because, frankly, in most disciplines the way to obtain deep results is quite painful.
But, as long as you obtain reasonably deep results in your topics of interest, you should be fine. Then, it shows that you are willing to learn new things, able to tackle problems that you don't know for a long time etc.
However, bear in mind that the boundary between the 1st case (no deep results) and the 2nd case can be very thin, and different people may consider it differently. For the sake of a Masters or a PhD, I think that each of them should be quite narrowly focused. On the other hand, it does not harm at all if you have a thesis on your primary field that contains good results, and at the same time you publish something in a secondary field.
Last, but not least, you have to remember one more thing: Who is funding you? Does he mind that he spends his project money on you and you work on something else? Your supervisor should be aware of the fact that you work on something else and should, at least to some extent, approve it.
You may work on different topics but you still at need to specialize on some topic, and there should preferably be some relationships between the various topics.
You basically need a main topic for your M.Sc and a main topic for your Ph.d and you can have another topic after that, but it need to be related.
I will give you an example. I did a master degree related to e-learning and cognitive modelling. During my Ph.D., I still did the same topic but slowly changed to data mining in e-learning. During post-doc, I did pure data mining. And then, now I do mostly data mining and some applications of data mining. As you can see, I have changed topics over time, but there is always some overlap.
It is important that the topics are related because you will probably want to apply for some grants/scholarships and so on, and it may be easier to get grants/scholarships if you keep working on the same topic.
You may also have a few side-projects with other collaborators during your studies (that is what I did), but you should still focus on a specific topic for your main research.
Lastly, I ever saw some senior researcher working on two very diferent topics. For example, a researcher was publishing fundamental papers in Physics and in Computer Science. Although, this is possible, this is an exception.
Having a good knowledge of other subject areas can allow you to think about a project in different ways; for example by making you more aware of some confounding factors or being more able to come up with an explanation of something because of a link to some other area.
However, a PhD is really an in depth study of a fairly narrow research question over a few years. If you go into the application process looking like you want your PhD to be broad but shallow, you will likely look like you don't really know what a PhD involves and probably wouldn't enjoy doing one. It is also good to look like you have a particular passion that you would like to follow.
I think it would be good to say something which amounts to:
"My interests in Computer Science are broad, and I have enjoyed thinking about a range of subjects from A to Z and the links between them. This has allowed me to make a more informed decision about the subjects I would like to continue working on; and I have decided that an in depth study of either A or B would suit my interests."
Ideally A or B are things which are covered by the research interests of the person or institute you are applying to. If the CS department has a wide range of research interests you could also say that you would enjoy being in a place where you can still hear about a range of topics through seminars etc.
Finally, cross-subject and collaborative projects which span research groups are also possible. I assume there are opportunities for this in CS, but I don't have the knowledge to comment on that.
Most in academia say that it is the freedom in research that is the only attractive part to come to academia. Then you enter academia and realize that you are 'supposed' to work on a specific research topic or two, you are allowed to change topics only if they are related to each other, either funding agency or establishments (in the US, read: tenured committees) or both govern your research choices. What's the point of being in academia having low salary and not much (after choosing your first research topic, that is) freedom in research?
I suggest you follow your heart and work on whatever you like. Of course, you have to demonstrate your research by publishing in respected journals in those areas. It is your university and thesis adviser who will decide (and guide at various step during the ph.d. of course) if they want to give you a ph.d. Once you have a ph.d. from a genuine university, what others think about 'depth' or 'shallowness' of your thesis etc. are just opinions. If the establishment doesn't support interdisciplinary research, and don't give you a job - well, you have a computer science degree, and you will be easily absorbed in the industry. At least you will have died hard by then without bowing down to anyone. If you find a permanent job in academia, then do support such academic freedom as much as you can.
Adding to the excellent answer written by @yo', I will point out that when you submit a CV as part of an application for something specific, you don't have to include everything you've ever done. It's generally a good idea to have a master CV that has everything in it, including the dry cleaning store you worked at when you were 16, but when you're preparing an application for something that requires submitting a CV, do some pruning so that the version you submit fits what you think they are looking for.
What might help you keep your focus narrow enough to complete your graduate study in a reasonable amount of time, would be to keep a special file or notebook where you jot down areas, projects, and ideas that intrigue you for future use. I believe creative writers do this, to help them finish a book they've started, before wandering off into another project.
It's nice to see you excited about several strands, which may even feed each other at some point. Just remember, you still have many years ahead of you.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.095306 | 2015-08-08T17:03:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/51171",
"authors": [
"Piotr Migdal",
"aaaaaaaaaaaa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11340",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
29953 | How should I deal with my groupmate's unprofessional behavior as a TA?
I have a colleague in my group who became TA for a course which we took together, which is taught by our mutual advisor. It is almost a policy that a student can't become TA unless he scores an A in the course, but he was chosen because he asked "first" and the professor is "nice", even though I was the highest scoring student, which usually gets the teaching assistantship. He also knew that I wanted to TA that course, yet he still asked.
Many students come to him for questions or help. He usually tells them to copy the homework (!) or to ask me or a colleague of mine for help because "he doesn't know and [me and my colleague] know the material much better!"
How do I deal with such a person? I mean, my colleague and I try to answer all the questions the students have, but the annoying thing is that we can't be doing half the job while he gets all the money. We spend our time trying to help others where he should do that. We are very busy people and we don't have time for this when we don't have to officially do it.
Should I talk to my advisor about this? I don't want to sound as if I'm envious.
I don't want to sound like the envious person here Well, you do. Get over the frustration and stop working for free if you think it doesn't benefit you at all.
This sounds much more like a rant than a question.
This is not a full-fledged answer but simply a suggestion that you should definitely talk to your advisor about this for the following reason: if your colleague was given this position because your advisor is "nice", it leads one to wonder what other unwarranted advantages others might get at your expense because your advisor is "nice".
If you don't have the time to help others, don't do it! Tell them there is a TA paid to help and if he can't THEY should complain about that fact. If a lot of people go to the professor for help because the TA is of no use, he will get the picture! (And he will help them if he really is "nice")
Some of your colleague's behavior is rude, but "He also knew that I wanted to TA that course, yet he still asked" isn't. Whether within academia and outside, if you want things in life you should be prepared to ask for them and to explain why you deserve them.
Being nice is nice, but you also need to set your own priorities. You are not the TA for that course, so you are not obliged to answer any questions. If you happen to have time and feel like answering a question (notice the singular), then fine, answer it. When not, just politely say you don't have time and that they should go see the TA. Also, you are not responsible for (bad) advice given by that TA. Instead I would focus on getting your own research done, or do the TAing of some other course.
I would go further and say that you could actually be doing more long-term damage by helping these students. You should refuse to help on the grounds that you're not the TA. If a student is upset, let them know that they should take up issues about their TA with their professor, not with you. If you and your labmates keep picking up this guy's slack, the professor might get the idea that everything's going fine, and might continue to hire sub-par TAs to be "nice" in the future. However, if he gets a bunch of complaints from the students he'll know that he needs to hire a better TA next year.
@DaoWen So if a customer asks his waiter for a refill and the waiter tells the customer to ask the busboy, the busboy should say to the customer "no, that's not my job, go ask the server again" rather than the busboy informing the manager like a professional? ie the student's job is to learn - why is the onus being put on them to solve the behind-the-scenes academic drama? This person sees a problem that can be easily addressed with the professor and the answer is self-evident, he/she just doesn't want to confront it.
@coburne - Analogies only work so far as the analogy actually holds. In this case, I'd say a more accurate analogy would be that the waiter tells the customer to ask the guy running the burger stand on the corner about the refill. The key distinction here is that the OP is not in any way involved with the course in question, so why would it be his responsibility to deal with problems between the students and the TA? The professor should be the one dealing with that.
@DaoWen If your analogy is more accurate, then the usage of the word "colleagues" doesn't apply.
The students don't know what kind of arrangement these guys may have. The questioner on the other hand knows the situation and he knows all the parties involved. So he's 100% capable of addressing the issue and working towards resolution. But your answer here is "its not your problem, pass the buck". Don't you remember the lesson from the beginning of the Spiderman movie? Spiderman could've stopped that criminal, but he didn't and his Uncle Ben died because of his inaction. Why do you hate Uncle Ben?
@coburne: As I explain in my answer, identifying problems that are not yours, and assigning them a lower priority than those that are, is a vital skill for success in academia. Frankly, I find your analogies inapt (graduate students are neither busboys nor Spider-Men) and your tone needlessly argumentative.
@coburne - "colleagues" does apply because the OP and the TA are grad students at the same university, and even have the same advisor—but that still doesn't mean he's involved with the course in question. A big part of the issue here is that the OP really isn't in a position to fix the problem. It would be bad for him to go to their mutual advisor and say "the guy you decided to hire instead of me is lazy, so you should fire him and give me the job now." He wouldn't say that—but no matter what he says, that's how it'll seem. This is why it's on the students to take care of this.
@coburne Think of it from the students' perspective. They go to their TA and ask a question. The TA responds "I don't know". What does the student do? Sit around hoping the situation resolves itself? I would hope the student would elevate the issue to the professor. "Hey prof, I asked the TA but they don't know the answer...can you give me an answer for xyz?" If the professor receives lots of these kinds of e-mails, they might take the hint themselves..."Hmm, my TA isn't good at their job..."
@coburne, both the asker and the OP are simple students, but the TA is not - he's part of the teaching personnel. Is HIS duty to answer that questions. The OP is just another student that HAPPENS to be groupmate with the TA. So, using you bar analogy, is like asking the guy next table to get your refill and not the waiter.
@coburne what you wrote isn't quite clear to me, but if it's what I think it is it sounds grotesquely inconsiderate and malicious. You wrote that instead of the busboy telling the person to ask the TA, he should "inform.. the manager like a professional?" That is a very sly way of complaining that the TA isn't doing his job,so what you want happens, the TA loses his job so u can get it. My memory being a student was when a TA wasn't good it got reported(at least one student will want to report him),it happened twice, different TAs different classes.But not by another TA trying to get the job!
@barlop Its not that he's not doing is job, just more shock at the apparently widely-accepted disregard of the importance in upholding some sort of code of ethics in seeing to the students' proper education. There's clearly a problem that's preventing a proper learning environment and everybody's jumping over each other to make sure it's clear that it's not his problem and he shouldn't do anything. Don't you guys have some sort Declaration of Geneva equivalent? I guess the answer to that has already been given in the replies above.
All the analogies confuse me more than it helps me to understand your points. As I understand the situation: there is a TA that does not work well, and the course suffers. What should someone who is not involved with that course and is not in any position of authority do about it? He should not "hide" the problem by covering for the bad TA. In the long run that is in the best interest of the students. The current students suffer and that is too bad. You cannot solve all problems, and if you try you will solve no problem at all.
He could say to the TA that he got an A and he got the highest score, he loves the course and he is very disappointed that he didn't get to be TA. I think that's ok particularly given that the other guy asked when he didn't really deserve it. But to say the other guy isn't good that's bad, and not your job particularly bad since you are saying it partly to get his job. That's up to students to decide of their own volition. Or go over the head of the TA if that fails.. as u got the highest score and if that's a firmly kept rule then it's very unfair.
I agree that this is unprofessional behavior on the part of the other TA (let's call him X).
I understand your instinct is to try to help the students when they come to you, and that's certainly generous of you. Unfortunately, this sort of thing represents a very common pitfall for young academics. Working with students is very rewarding, in the short term: it feels like something where you can make an immediate difference in someone's life. This is especially true in contrast to research, where work is often solitary and progress is slow and difficult to discern. So spending extra time with students, while helpful in itself, has the potential to become a serious distraction in the long run. Balancing one's time between teaching, research, and other activities can be one of the hardest thing for an academic to do (it certainly is for me).
So I think this is a good opportunity for you to practice "protecting your time". Helping X's students, even if you enjoy it or feel the students really need it, is not something that can take priority over other tasks that are specifically your responsibilities (e.g. your research).
I would suggest having a talk with X and tell him that you're not going to be able to help out his students, and to please not send them to you. If you feel you need a justification for this, you can just say it's distracting you from your research or studies or something similar. If X's students keep coming to you anyway, you can politely tell them "I'm sorry, but I'm not the right person to help you with this. I'd suggest that you ask the professor during her office hours." You don't need to get involved any further; if lots of students start coming to the professor and complaining that X can't answer their questions (and in my experience, believe me, they will), or even that X sent them to you, who couldn't help: she will figure out that something is amiss.
I agree with the other posts that you should not explicitly try to play this to your advantage as far as getting the TA position. That seems to have the potential to backfire. It may work out for you in the long run, but stay at arm's length while things run their course.
On a side note, you mentioned that you've overheard X encouraging students to "copy their homework". I'm not quite sure what that means out of context, but if you mean X is telling them to do something dishonest like copy from each other without attribution, then this is a much more serious matter that I think obliges you to step in - it puts X over the line from unprofessional to unethical. If you feel you have enough of a relationship with X to speak frankly, tell him that's a bad idea: it's likely to get students in serious trouble, and also him if they tell the professor he told them to do it. Otherwise, or if X doesn't seem to take you seriously, alert the professor.
+1 and I think you need to elaborate on the first few paragraphs in an answer to this question
This is very sound advice, probably the least likely to backfire.
+1 for "talk with X and tell him that you're not going to be able to help out his students, and to please not send them to you", and if the students keep coming, say "ask the professor during her office hours."
The biggest issue, I feel, is how you're handling the situation where your friend asks you for help. Whereas other people have addressed your bounds, I feel like we have to address how you are treating those bounds.
I'm going to say a statement that, up until a year ago, felt very alien.
"My needs are as important or more important than the needs of others."
Say that a couple of times in your head. It sounds selfish or wrong to say such a thing. And that's what I felt as well when I was told this statement initially.
But is it really wrong? Of course not. When we evaluate the greater good, we sometimes devalue our personal selves, even though we have a vested interest in it, in an attempt to remain unbiased. This works well in standalone situations, but not in this one.
Consider the scenario you've presented.
Your friend, knowing full well you wanted the spot, took it from you. Then he comes to you to ask you to help his students. And you've gone ahead and helped him and now you're complaining about why you have to do that.
You've, in short, placed his needs above your own needs. You don't get anything out of this relationship. You may have heard of this type of relation: a toxic one. It wastes your time and returns you nothing and gives him all the credit when his students succeed.
You're never going to get the TA job you want if he's in it. And you're helping him stay in it!
You may feel like you're doing people a service, but you're not. If this TA is bad, he should be removed. Your helping him will keep him there and impact the learning capabilities of other students, and waste your time for little to no benefit.
If you really want to help these students, you should be doing this on your own time when you feel like it, not because your friend asks you to help him do something he should be doing by himself. Instead, you're helping carrying your friend's responsibility for him when he accepted a role that traditionally bears all the responsibility alone.
You need to be willing to say no to this person.
Voted down, because it's pseudo-psychological gibberish, not actual advice.
There are two separate issues here that you should mentally separate:
Your friend got a job you wanted.
Your friend is not doing that job well.
As for the first point, not much can be done after the fact. Perhaps make your interest in the course known to the professor who will teach that course next time.
As for the second point, you are well within your bounds to refuse to help students since you're not associated with that course. You can tell your friends that you're too busy with research and other TA duties to help his/her students. This dissociates the prior TA-assignment incident with the actual matter at hand.
It strikes me that the underlying cause of your unhappiness is not the professionalism or otherwise of the person that got the TA position, or the impact of his behaviour on you, but the fact that he got the position you wanted and that seems unfair to you. Here's a lesson that will serve you well I think: life is not fair. The world of work is not fair. Career progression, in particular, is not fair. Good things do not automatically go to the most deserving. If you want something, do not sit back and wait for it to fall into your lap because you think you deserve it for working hard or whatever.
Rather than focusing your anger on him, you should ask yourself: who or what is responsible for this state of affairs? Some helpful information would be to know whether you made your desire to be TA known to the advisor - if you didn't then you must have been hoping the advisor would simply offer it to you. Your colleague meanwhile made his desires to be TA known. Why shouldn't he? Did you really think that he should not pursue his ambitions out of some sort of deference to you because you have better scores? If he (or you or anyone else) adopted that policy they would never get anywhere in life. If you think he should not have been made TA and you should AND the advisor knew of your desire, then the responsible party is the advisor for picking someone else. If the advisor did not know of your desire then either you are responsible for not making your wishes clear, or your advisor is responsible for not asking you whether you wanted it before giving it to someone else. In either scenario, your colleague is not responsible for "depriving" you of the TA position.
So, if you feel something is amiss with him being made TA, talk to the advisor.
With the day-to-day behaviour of the TA it's a different matter - if you are not happy having work pushed over to you in this way then talk first to the TA about it, and if that has no effect talk to the advisor about it. Sitting there complaining and making accusations behind someone's back isn't particularly professional either. If you want things to change, start asking for what you want.
I would try to quantify the manifestations which are objectively problematic. How often are you interrupted by students? How many tell you (in so many words) that your so-called friend could not or would not help them? What other tasks suffer because of this, and by how much?
Collect data, black on white, until either (a) you can convince your professor that something is wrong, even if not to the point where you can get things your way; or (b) you convince yourself that it may not be worth your time and effort after all -- I know it seems preposterous now, but my experience is that sometimes that's what happens when time passes.
Don't wait too long to make that decision. Sounds to me like maybe you should give it a week, maximum.
You might not need your data, but it's a good starting point for objectively assessing the situation, and if somebody should ask you for numbers or other proof, you know you are prepared.
Strive to remain professional. Try to reason about what's beneficial for the students, the department, the collective, in the long run; not yourself or the problematic TA. Still, if you are doing unpaid work, I would consider bringing up the topic of fair compensation.
Honestly, your question could be (and probably should be) shortened to:
I'm really good at subject X, and students keep coming to me for help on subject X. How should I respond, given that I don't have time for this?
I'd advise the following response:
"I really wish I could help, but I don't have time. You really should ask your teacher, or teacher's assistant if you have one."
And you're done. There is no need to be concerned about how they came to know of your skills, or become involved in petty politics or whether someone is getting a free ride or passing the buck.
If the student indicates that they've already tried those resources, you might remind them that they are paying students, and if their teacher or TA aren't meeting their needs, they may have to have a discussion with them, or bring it up with their guidance counselors. Also suggest that they might want to form study groups with others in their class.
Lastly, if you enjoy teaching them, offer tutoring services. This will give you the ability to receive pay for your work, without all the overhead the TA has to deal with, and you're already receiving free advertising.
Regardless, there is no need to carry bitterness and acrimony into these situations. Treat it as though you hadn't been hurt, and as though the TA and teacher are both acting in the student's best interests, and then decide how to act from that point. The answer should be obvious once you ignore your personal baggage.
If you have to answer most of questions from students, it seems to me that the TA does not prepare enough the material he suppose to teach and this is a totally unprofessional.
Answering students is not helping them, since you can answer particular questions (about a particular homework,...) but you have no time to teach how to have a global understanding on the material. In this situation, you should speak to your advisor. If you want to make it smooth and keep a friendly relation with the TA, you may warn him first that you cannot continue to answer the students questions and that he has to prepare thoroughly the material.
Of course, noone has a perfect knowledge of everything, so you probably should keep yourself available to answer theoritical questions from the TA, not homeworks questions from the students. The TA validated this course, so he knows well part of the material. By ponctually answering the question of the TA, you help him to master it completely and to answer himself to students questions.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.096033 | 2014-10-14T12:42:31 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/29953",
"authors": [
"ABID Meriem",
"Alex",
"Anonymous",
"Billy Kalfus",
"Cape Code",
"Dan Temkin",
"DaoWen",
"Davidmh",
"Fabricio Araujo",
"Jose Maria Hernandez Alava",
"Josef",
"Latifkdr",
"Maarten Buis",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Phil N DeBlanc",
"RAVI",
"Santiago Canez",
"Shaz",
"Wesley Forsberg",
"Yixiao",
"barlop",
"bjorndt",
"boblys",
"chrism238",
"coburne",
"computercarguy",
"ezrakilty",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10529",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11349",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11565",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13462",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13803",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15566",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16108",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6150",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7238",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82598",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82599",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82603",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82604",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82605",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82606",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82622",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82625",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82626",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82628",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82644",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82651",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82666",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82707",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82714",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82732",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82797",
"lalo",
"matheusmnz",
"mhwombat",
"somnth maji",
"user82603",
"woof",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
94690 | Can I submit a review paper to a journal without being invited?
I am currently in the process of waiting for PhD verdict. I have submitted the thesis last 2 weeks for examination and I am thinking while waiting for PhD verdict, I want to write a review paper on my subject. The reason is because I have ran out results from my PhD study for publication and I reckon why not try on reviewing the subject I am studying. My area of research is biological science. My question is whether it is possible to write a review to journal without being invited to do so.
Your literal question is obviously not what you mean to ask. Of course you can submit anything anywhere. You surely mean to ask whether there's any point in submitting a review paper... as in whether or not it has any chance of being accepted for publication, apart from the question of whether it's good to take the trouble to write up such a thing in the first place. I'd say that it's good (if there's nothing else in your event queue) to compose review papers, because it's personally educational. However, other people may not be much interested in the perception of a field by a novice.
I just did it on mitochondrial origins. I wasn't invited, no one asked for it, many people already did it, my grant somewhat required it, and I definitely needed it to organize the facts and theories I read in the last three years. Hopefully from an objective viewpoint. I was even turned down by one journal stating that they already have one such paper in the pipeline by someone else.
Yes, it is absolutely possible to write a review paper without being invited to do so.
How do I know this?
I've done it, several times, in the biological sciences.
The key is to recognize that the review needs to be invited at some point, but that point need not be "before you've written anything down*. If you have a target journal, and you think it is a decent fit for the review paper, I would suggest that you find the email for the appropriate section editor (or the Editor-in-Chief if there is none) and write them a polite email inquiring as to whether or not they would be interested in inviting a review on X topic, a draft of which is attached. Articulate why you think this is useful and interesting to their readership, and hope for the best.
And before we get on the "A PhD isn't enough clout to write a review", my first review was published with an undergraduate as the primary author.
You should check with the journal you plan to submit to. Many do not accept unsolicited review articles, so it would be a waste of time to write something that won't get considered.
Every review I've ever published began with "Hey, you want to solicit this unsolicited review?"
Personally I did write a review paper just after getting my PhD. The paper was, to be precise, invited. But it is not the point here.
In my case, I reviewed a niche or subset topic of a new and "trendy" field. I was really sure to be, if not the more conpetent, at least the more up to date person in that specific subject. Otherwise, I wouldn't have done that.
Firstly let me tell you that review papers are always more or less invited. They are written by the experts in the field. Basically it serves as an excellent reference to anyone who wants to learn from the masters. It also generally covers a wide area of the subject. So I would suggest that review paper would not be a good idea for you at this stage. There are no. Of reasons. 1. You are not invited! 2. A PhD degree is not always enough to know adequately about the subject unless you are a top shot. Therefore a PhD candidate can never fall under the category of an "expert". 3. A PhD student may not know the entire length and breadth of the area.
So I would suggest that a review paper is not a good idea now. You can certainly do it one day when you are a master yourself but not presently. Besides, it would also be a great idea to ask your advisor.
Cheers.
This answer may not be universal. I believe that in some areas it's common for PhD students to write review papers.
I know my PhD colleagues who write review papers with their supervisors. Maybe we come from different background
Oh yeah that might be the case then. Therefore, I don't see a specific solution to the question. Since it may vary from the field to field.
-1. My first, and heavily cited review paper, violated all three of your points.
As I already clarified, it may vary from domain to domain. You can't imagine doing that in astrophysics.
-1: I can't imagine that, even in fields where most review articles are written by senior people, that they're all invited. Surely some senior people decide to write a review article by themselves, and surely any journal that publishes review articles would be happy to consider unsolicited review articles from senior researchers.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.097971 | 2017-08-17T21:21:51 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/94690",
"authors": [
"Fomite",
"István Zachar",
"Peter Shor ",
"Souvik",
"Thomas Steinke",
"alex",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42889",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44249",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46305",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78632",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
49134 | Asking to not present in a conference on Saturday
I am about to submit a paper to a conference. I just found out that the conference falls in Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Since I am an observant Jew, I don't want to present on Saturday. What are my options?
I thought to submit the paper, and if it is accepted, explicitly ask the organizers to schedule me to another day. Is this possible/acceptable?
Another option is to submit the paper, and if it is accepted and scheduled on Saturday (and the organizers don't agree to change this), then withdraw the paper. This is of course less preferable as it, probably, creates bad reputation if I don't present an accepted paper (I am also not sure if it will be published: Presented a paper in a conference, but my paper did not get published in proceeding )
The third option is not to submit at all, in order to prevent the option that I have to withdraw an accepted paper.
@NajibIdrissi This is also a good option, thanks
Option 5: Submit the paper and, if accepted, ask the organizers to not schedule on Saturday. If they can accommodate, great; if not, ask someone else to give the presentation on your behalf.
I routinely do 1, and it's never been a problem (i.e. 100% of my scheduling requests have been accommodated). Just make your request sooner rather than later, to make it easier for the organizers.
If your paper is accepted is it perfectly appropriate to ask them to observe your religious guidelines. A lot of people will give special date restrictions when presenting in a conference for lesser things like they need to fly home by a certain date, their funding doesn't cover hotels for the length of the conference, or they just don't have a desire to stay the whole time.
Good luck with presentations!
As a conference chair I've generally been able to satisfy these kinds of requests without any trouble.
In fact, if it was a problem, that would mean you find that a majority of presenters have a problem presenting on a given day. It's highly likely that means you'll have an attendance problem on that day too. The sooner you find out about this potential problem, the better!
I would say that this falls under the category of "reasonable requests for accommodation," and suggest pursuing option #1: first see if you're accepted, and then if you are, send a request to not be scheduled on Saturday. The conference schedule is almost certainly not yet determined (it will depend on the distribution of accepted papers), and the fraction of the schedule that is problematic for you is pretty small. Thus, if you are prompt in requesting accommodation after being notified of acceptance, there is a good chance that the organizers will be willing to make it happen. If they do not, however, you may need to ask a colleague to present or to withdraw.
Pragmatically, scheduling accommodations are more likely to happen in small conferences than in large conferences. If you're dealing with a single-track conference with a couple dozen talks, they will almost certainly be willing to flex the schedule for you. If you are dealing with a multi-track conference with hundreds of talks, however, it is possible that they simply will not bother because your talk means so little to them.
It's also possible that the organisers intend to group presentations into themed sessions, and if two presenters in the same session have conflicting requests then only one of them will be able to present. This doesn't mean that the organisers necessarily don't care about the talk they have to exclude.
@MJeffryes 1) Having done my share of thematic grouping, I can tell you that it's often a very loose and post-facto process. 2) Even if session boundaries are rigid, moving a talk into its own displaced "session fragment" often works. My "don't care" observation comes from watching the behaviors of some particular massive conferences which really don't care---certain organizers sometimes hold an arrogant attitude where they feel it is a privilege for people to talk in their conference, and so presenters should bend to accommodate them and not the other way around.
It may or may not work.
I don't know how it is in other fields, but in most medium-to-large conferences I've presented in (geosciences), people don't only submit to the conference, but upon submission, select a particular session. Sessions are scheduled to occur on particular days. The session convener cannot schedule presentations outside her or his particular session. To reschedule, the conference organisation would have to reschedule the entire session, something they are unlikely to be willing to do.
But, I would go ahead and submit. If you do end up being scheduled on a Saturday, and it does end up such that it cannot be rescheduled, I would ask a co-author to present on your behalf. This is not an optimal situation, but it is a lot better than withdrawing completely.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.098398 | 2015-07-21T13:34:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/49134",
"authors": [
"Alexander Belyi",
"Brian Borchers",
"Devstr",
"Erel Segal-Halevi",
"Jaipal Singh",
"MJeffryes",
"Mad Jack",
"Nathan Fanlau",
"Philipp Wendler",
"Spammer",
"Touniouk",
"Yifan Lyu",
"corsiKa",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136278",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136279",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136280",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136282",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136283",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136296",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136447",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136683",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31487",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/787",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877",
"jakebeal",
"lol"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.