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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
36484 | How to get list of journals in a discipline within a specified range of impact factors?
I am looking for journals about A with impact factor between X and Y. Is there any way to find that on IEEE web site?
InCites (from Thomson-Reuters) can handle this kind of search.
If you want to use only IEEE websites, probably you should manually go to each journal's homepage, e.g., here's IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory's page http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=18 and it shows its impact factor right there. If you want some sort of list, this seems to be the closest you can get: http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/journmag/journalcitations.html Of course, it's a lot easier if you have access to JCR or other similar service. If Eiganfactor/article influence score is ok, this will help http://www.eigenfactor.org/
Web of Science Journal Citation Reports provides lists of journals on a topic along with a range of citation-based metrics, including impact factor. It's straight forward to sort such lists by impact factor and then extract journals within a range.
Many universities have subscriptions to Web of Science Journal Citation Reports. So check out your university library.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.479844 | 2015-01-08T23:36:19 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/36484",
"authors": [
"Bolton Bailey",
"John Swallow",
"Ole J. Forsberg",
"Stephen",
"Tong",
"Yuichiro Fujiwara",
"aeismail",
"de.doughboy",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7075",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99016",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99018",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99022",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99023",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99026"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
26404 | How to obtain number of publications by year on a given subject?
Does anyone know of a good way to obtain data on the number of publications per year on a given subject? Scholar has an option to sort search results by date, but there does not seem to be an automated way of generating a report. In the worst case I will write a script that extracts the data I need, but perhaps someone knows of another system that offers such a facility? Thank you.
Scholar only tracks publications that are available online (either freely or through one of Google's subscriptions). This is only a fraction of actual publications.
Additionally, it seems very difficult to define good, automatically trackable borders for what papers are "on a given subject" and which belong to different subjects.
As to what's on a given topic, I'm happy with papers that mention the exact phrase. I'm going to go on the Web of Science, do a keyword search and run a script on the results.
Google has the overwhelming majority of "articles" published in peer-reviewed journals, so I would not argue that it is missing much, unless you are interested in conference abstracts and such.
ISI Journal Citation Reports
ISI Journal citation reports might give you some useful information (your university may have a subscription).
It allows you to browse citation reports by subject category (i.e., discipline). It includes things like impact factor, total counted citations, total articles in the focal year.
You can then click "view journal summary list" which will give you an overview.
For example, here is sample output for psychology in the 2013 JCR:
Of course, this only includes articles in journals indexed by ISI.
Publish or Perish Software
More generally, you might want to check out Publish or Perish. It is free software for Windows and OSX that provides a way of searching Google Scholar particularly suited to bibliometric analysis.
dimensions.ai automatically generates a plot of such information when you search for papers on it. I've found it very useful myself.
(I know this is an old question, but I'm adding this answer just in case someone comes across it.)
I don't know of a solution for arbitrary field and subject; I suspect none exists at present. But in mathematics, you could at least easily check how many publications there are each year in a given AMS subject classification.
For instance, this search result shows that 23 papers were published on Enumeration in graph theory in 2005. Note: you may need a subscription to access that link.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.479998 | 2014-07-25T23:04:26 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26404",
"authors": [
"Behacad",
"Bharg",
"Bracula",
"Evil Hamster",
"JeffE",
"MGA",
"Motaibi1989",
"Pumesies",
"betafractal",
"e7lT2P",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15261",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20011",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70721",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70722",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73773",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75096",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75147",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75148",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75149",
"rajakumar sundaram",
"xLeitix"
],
"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
} |
18235 | What costs should be covered when inviting a university professor from another country to attend your university?
What costs should be covered when inviting a university professor from another country to visit your university?
For example, imagine you wanted to invite a university professor from Harvard to a European university.
2 close votes and no comments?
I've given it an edit to make it a bit more useful. That said, it would be useful to further clarify what kind of visit the question pertains to (e.g., short stay, long stay). Does the academic want to come anyway? or are you paying them to come in addition to their expenses?
I am not sure why people want to close this question. A comment would certainly be helpful here.
I don't think this question has any absolute answer. This depends on the professor (a "famous" speaker for a large public event will be a different issue than a "regular" professor that comes to give a talk for the students and faculty of the university), the host institution (a professor might be happy to go and give a talk at ETH Zurich, and maybe less so to travel to an unknown university), how long the trip is, and whether there are some pre-existing relations (i.e., whether the inviting professor is already friends with or at least an academic acquaintance of the speaker).
Minimally, it is standard that all costs of the speaker are covered, including (sometimes) business class airfare and a nice hotel for the duration of the trip. If the invited talk happens as part of a conference, the conference fee or entry should be waived for the speaker. Further, it is customary at least in my field to give the speaker a small (local) present, such as a bottle of good regional wine, as a sign of appreciation directly after the talk.
Whether the speaker asks for money on top of this depends on all the things above, but this seems to be relatively unusual in my field. The only persons that actually get paid in money to come and give a talk are well-known public figures, like Tim Berners-Lee. I have recently had the honour to listen to a talk of Don Knuth, and rumor has it that not even Knuth was asking for direct payment.
While there might not be a request for payment, some universities and seminar series offer an honorarium for the speakers (on the order of a few hundred dollars or Euros). I think it is also not standard to expect to pay business class airfare—and many universities will not allow this.
Yes, in the U.S. it has been required to travel "coach"... but with the ever-shrinking ever-deteriorating air travel conditions, this may have to change unless only physically very small people travel.
@aeismail Maybe you should not "expect" business class, but at least in my field it is certainly not uncommon that invited speakers for larger events get paid business class.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.480229 | 2014-03-17T10:40:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18235",
"authors": [
"Jeromy Anglim",
"Leonardy Kristianto",
"Qmppu842",
"Yai0Phah",
"aeismail",
"ceria",
"earthling",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49362",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49363",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49364",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49369",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
18184 | Is it possible for a high school student with no academic qualifications to publish a research paper?
I am a bachelor student at the second year of studies (Physics), but I'm an independent programmer since many more years.
Now, I have some data about an algorithm I've done and I would like to present the results on a research paper - I have a high level of understanding of the theory behind, and some background of theoretical computer science. Is it "reasonable" to write a paper with no titles at all (high school) and without the name of my university maybe?
I don't know whether include it or not, since the topic is not related to what I study there.
Sure, why not? Nobody in theoretical computer science cares where you work, how old you are, or what color your hair is. But do run your paper past a local expert before submitting it anywhere. As in any other community, there are social norms that must be followed.
I will, thanks. And I had also this doubt, WHERE should I publish it then..?
@Novalink: That's something your "local expert" should advise you on. We have no idea what the subject of your algorithm is, or how strong the paper is, so any recommendation you received here would be purely conjectural.
You are right, of course I will ask for improvements to someone more expert than me before publishing, thanks.
You should definitely write it up. There are plenty of good reasons for doing so and no downside. Writing a paper is a good exercise for future paper and report writing, and while you are doing it you are likely to think of new ideas about your research. You will also have to search for similar work that might be suitable for references and you may find something useful there too.
You should also put the paper online somewhere so that it is preserved and available to others who may find it useful. If there is data and/or code that goes with the paper you can use figshare for example. It does not matter if there is not much response to your work, that is common when authors have no background and does not mean it is not good. Someone may pick up on it later when you don't expect it.
You might also want to try to publish in a peer-review journal if you think it is sufficiently original and useful. That might require you to write it up in a specific format such at LaTeX. Again that is all good experience. You will have a much better chance of acceptance in a journal if you can use your university affiliation but you will have to make it clear that you are an undergraduate there to avoid problems and it might be best to check with your tutor. If you search around you may find a suitable journal that is specifically set up to accept work from undergraduates. If you can get it accepted it would look good on your CV whatever you plan to do in the future.
The only circumstance that would make it unwise to publish your work would be if the algorithm is original and of high commercial value and/or patentable in which case you would have to follow a different route to protect your intellectual property. However that is a rare situation.
Thank You. Definitely You gave me some hints. One more thing then, I would like it to be published from the beginning (my aim is to gather feedback about my writing and my ideas mostly, and yes write some original literature), so which networks do you suggest for publishing, peer-reviewed or not? I have already a very good academic english and I write in LaTeX everything science-related (also all my lab reports).
It depends what you write. Perhaps you should write it as a preprint and then seek advice on where to publish. Obviously you can search for undergraduate journals and there are plenty of Google hits, so that is one way to go.
My academic advisor certainly seems to think that this would be possible! I have researched and written about several subjects that are outside my major, and though none have (Yet!) been published, none of my professors or advisors seem to think it strange that I might have knowledge and interests outside my major, nor do they doubt that I am capable of producing quality work in those areas.
However, you may wish to find a professor in CS, and ask them to read and critique your paper. You will benefit from their academic experience, and their input makes it more likely that you can succeed in publishing a paper in an area outside your major.
Edit: Seek your advisor's input on this. If you plan to sink a large number of hours into a project outside your main research focus, s/he may not be altogether happy about that. This caveat may not apply in your case, since you are still in the undergraduate phase, but may be more of an issue later.
yes. I've had experience with grant reviewers noting things like a modest publication history all in all if the paper is good, the work is sound and you meet the editors guidelines and format the paper correctly for the journal...it should and will be published. Be extra cautious to acknowledge everyone especially those who loaned you or allowed you resources. I've seen personalities "smirk" at non-traditional success. You will be under more scrutiny most likely but I'm the end the end good science will prevail.
Do you mean journal editors? The statement that you've had peer reviewers do so is troubling in most disciplines since the review process is single or double blind. Either way the focus should be the content not the prior credentials held.
@virmaior Every journal is different but most in my experience have an editor with ultimate authority who almost always follow the direction of the reviewers of your paper. When u submit a paper it gets routed to a few people (reviewers) who have published material related to your field and in that journal. they critique the manuscript and send their recommendation to the editor. The editors help you correct the format and proof the paper merely, usually.
yes, but you stated that your peer reviewers noted your modest publication history while looking at your paper ... which would be impossible when the blind review process is used.
@virmaior No, that would only be impossible if the review was double blind, which is not always the case.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.480511 | 2014-03-15T18:42:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18184",
"authors": [
"BeMyGuest",
"Craig James Kehoe",
"Curious Math Student",
"JeffE",
"LowFieldTheory",
"Mien",
"Philip Gibbs",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"Travis",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13135",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13171",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19769",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49191",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49195",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49219",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49328",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7466",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76370",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/76417",
"rhill45",
"user2446219",
"virmaior"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
18273 | When there are multiple ISBNs, which should be reported in a reference list?
Which ISBN number should I use in my literature list?
I have for example used a book about Design Patterns for my thesis. But I found that books have two ISBN numbers. Which is prefered to use?
This is an example from a book I used as reference:
Print ISBN:978-0-596-00712-6 | ISBN 10:0-596-00712-4
ISBN numbers for a specific book vary between countries/regions and is thus not altogether very useful in international publications. When referencing a book, it is not customary to list ISBN-numbers, partly for the reason just stated. Instead you should be able to find a doi (digital object identifier) number, at least if the book is relatively new. There is otherwise no general rules about including such numbers in reference lists. With books the fields that must (or at least should be included are author(s)/editor(s), year of publication, title, publisher and place for the publisher (City).
Note that you can encode an ISBN into a DOI, so this could be a concern even for DOIs.
ISBN numbers for a specific book vary between countries/regions - Does this matter? As long as an ISBN uniquely identifies the exact book you used, it helps. Or are you saying that this is not the case across regions, i.e. two different books might have the same ISBN?
Many books have two ISBN numbers for each edition, and that's what's happening in the case you've cited. There are now two formats of ISBN, one with 13 digits and one with 10 digits. ISBN 10 is the older format. Since 2007, books have had both. The last digit in each case is the check(sum) digit, calculated from a hash of the previous digits.
The ISBN 13 is created from:
the digits 978
the first 9 digits of the ISBN 10 code
the recalculated check digit
That's what's going on in your case, and you can cite either the ISBN-13 or the ISBN-10.
It's also the case that different editions of a book have different ISBNs. That's not what's going on in your case. But when that is the case, you use the ISBN of the exact edition you've been using: that way, the content and page numbers should tally up, for anyone who follows up your ISBN and page number citation to see the original in context.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.481098 | 2014-03-18T12:25:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18273",
"authors": [
"Alexander Telfar",
"Federico Poloni",
"Hanul Jeon",
"Mangara",
"Patrycja Parszcz",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49480",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49481",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49482",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49663",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8185",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"lqiu",
"paul cheung",
"user49663"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
13184 | How important are physics and other non-math courses for admission into a math PhD?
I am a second year math major, and I intend to do my PhD from a top math school. Until now, I haven't taken any university level physics course. Somewhere in this site, I saw someone writing that courses related to theoretical physics (heavily loaded with mathematics) are also very important besides the regular math courses. So, my question is: How important are the physics courses? Or any other courses?
Math grad programs do not look at physics courses on the transcript, or think in those terms.
The point is that higher-level (not formulaic) physics courses can be beneficial to math people by providing other inputs for intuition. A common obstacle is that the higher-level physics courses do speak in terms of the lower-level ones, which are often quite alien to/from any sensible mathematical world-view.
But if one skips over those "immediate" things, one can find that there are "physcial imperatives" mandating mathematical "facts"... which might not be obvious on "purely mathematical" grounds.
The grandest example is "Green's functions" ... about which volumes can be written... An immediate point is that the idea is wonderful, is necessary, even if one cannot justify it. Green got the idea pre-1850, and it was completely understood in "rigorous" terms by L. Schwartz in 1950. Not easy, ...
That is, understanding other (very serious) inputs to mathematics is obviously helpful.
They might if you say you're planning to do research in one of a very few specific fields where physics is relevant. But in general, they don't.
Indeed, as @PeterShor notes, if a student's proposed specialization explicitly claims to bear on specific issues in physics... well, ignorance of physics wouldn't be sensible.
Indeed, one of my tutors accidentally became involved in theoretical physics once, or at least his name did. He's a topologist/geometer and he constructed the first examples of manifolds with certain properties that it turned out some string theorists had been looking for. I don't think his prior level of exposure to physics really mattered, he said the fact his work had application came as a surprise. Had he intended to do something significant in physics then knowing some physics might have made that more likely!
A possible benefit of non-math course(s) in the resume of a PhD applicant in math, is the fact that it shows that he has a wide research perspective and is eager to study different areas. That is definitely a huge plus for a grad student as one of the major sources of creativity, is bringing in ideas from areas that are sometimes totally irrelevant to the area under study. There are a lot of instances of innovations in for example Agile software engineering that came from manufacturing.
Though, as others mentioned, most universities should not care much. But if you target top universities, then you must know that they do receive a lot of good applicants. And this might be something that make your application stand out!
just my 2 cents..
In addition to "math" courses, a good math major should take courses in "related" areas; i.e. subjects that either use a lot of math, or contribute a lot of applications to math. Two of those subjects are physics and computer science.
Someone studying advanced calculus will do well to learn physics concepts such as gravity, charge and flux, as used in say, Newton's or Maxwell's equations. These offer the basis of gradients, divergences Gauss and Stoke's Theorems, and others. Likewise, a good computer science course might use mathematical topics such as recursion, graph theory, or various forms of logic. You might also consider Economics (specifically econometrics) courses that cover optimization and systems of equations as well as more advanced applications using partial differential equations.
Just avoid the kinds of courses sometimes referred to as "physics for poets" (algebraic applications only), or "programming for data processors" (elementary programming devoid of advanced mathematical concepts).
Make sure to have a decent overall GPA. Personally, even though physics uses a lot of mathematics, I would recommend that you take a more basic conceptual physics course, to understand the physics itself and learn it for its own sake. That way you will be better to appreciate the physics. If you are really passionate about math, then take math-related electives. That would show your commitment to the major. Maybe even do math-related research if that is your bent. Treat the physics courses as important, but do not worry if you are not doing as well in them as in your math courses. Because you are a math major, they will pay more attention to your major courses, but don't let yourself be discouraged.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.481317 | 2013-10-04T14:55:54 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13184",
"authors": [
"Angelica",
"Christa",
"James Elderfield",
"Luciano",
"Mike Stratton",
"Mohng",
"Peter Shor ",
"Seth Theriault",
"Some_Guy",
"Steve Jessop",
"Terry Price",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33656",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33657",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33658",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33660",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33712",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33713",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33717",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33721",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33722",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63303",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"marquisdecarabas",
"paul garrett"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
44651 | Graduate school admission with a degree in a different field
Can I be admitted to graduate school in a different field from my degree? Specific cases include:
If I've taken plenty of advanced courses in field X in the process of completing a degree in another field, can I apply to graduate school in X?
What if I haven't taken many courses in X, but I have acquired a good grasp of X through self-study or working in a related field?
What if I've never studied X, but I have done very well in an unrelated field? Could I be admitted to graduate school in X on the basis of general intellectual promise, and then make up the missing background after enrollment?
Note that this question is an attempt to provide a comprehensive answer, to avoid the need for a profusion of field-specific questions on this topic (see the associated meta question). Please feel free to edit the question or answer to improve them.
LImited usefulness. It's kind of like asking about similarities between two unspecified languages. You would really need to know what the two languages are, or what the previous field and the new field are.
@aparente001 This question is an attempt to cover the main cases in a way that allows people to self-assess. This site gets lots of questions of this form which are typically very difficult to provide good general answers to, since they depend closely on the particulars of the poster's background and intended program.
Overlap between fields influences how much additional background is required. E.g., a physics major might need to take half a dozen additional math classes to be adequately prepared for pure math grad school, while an English major might need to take nine or ten. But this doesn't change the fundamentals of "have you acquired most or all of the necessary background?" and "can you demonstrate that you've acquired it?". It just shifts where your starting point is.
So you're planning to refer people here in future, to save having to write many similar answers over and over again?
Exactly (see here for the background that led to this question). Recently we've been closing various questions of the form "can I apply to grad school in X with a degree in Y?" while referring them to a general discussion of how admissions works, and this question is intended to give a more specific and useful referral. It can't cover everything, but a lot of these questions seem to come down to the issues discussed here.
Graduate programs care far more about your background and preparation than about which field is listed on your degree. Even if the application requirements list a degree in X as a prerequisite, the department will very likely make an exception if you have a degree in another field but can demonstrate that your background is equivalent. How likely this is depends on which of the three cases listed above you are in:
Extensive formal study of X puts you in good shape. You should discuss this issue in your statement of purpose and make sure your letters of recommendation address it. Letters from people in field X who say your background is appropriate would be more convincing than letters from those in other fields.
The overall strategy is the same as in the previous case, but you'll have to work harder to make a compelling argument for admission. It's certainly possible to get admitted, but the rest of your application will have to be convincing enough to make up for not having courses in X on your transcript. When you request letters of recommendation from faculty in field X, you should specifically ask whether they are prepared to endorse your background as sufficient for admission (to avoid getting letters along the lines of "this applicant is smart and hard working, but I don't know much about their background and preparation"), and you should strategize with them about how you can present your background in the best possible light.
It's unlikely that you can be admitted at this point, for two reasons. One is that many people think they would like to study a field that's new to them, only to discover that it's more difficult or less interesting than they had expected. The other reason is that time in graduate school is a limited resource, and it's inefficient to use it to study prerequisites. You would generally be allowed to fill in a few gaps in your background, but not to begin studying the field from scratch. Instead, if you want to change fields you can begin by taking individual courses at a local university. It's also sometimes possible to enroll in post-baccalaureate programs aimed at helping people change fields (but the availability of such programs varies, depending on the field and location).
There is a notable exception to #3, and that is the handful of fields where there is no meaningful pre-graduate coursework in those fields. For example, there are vanishingly few undergraduate programs in epidemiology, and as such there is very little expectation that you have taken specific coursework, and nearly the entire admitted graduate class will be "switchers" of some form or another. In these cases, what is likely most helpful is to be able to articulate how your present program and course of study has led you to be interested in, and prepared for, further coursework in that field.
I've added a note about 3 for some fields near and dear to my heart where the otherwise excellent answer is less applicable.
I would like to add to the other answers the fact that the ease with which you can jump to a different field in graduate school depends on the nature of your new field. One factor to consider is how interdisciplinary your new field is. Some traditional fields, such as mathematics, physics, and to a lesser extent chemistry, have a fairly strict hierarchy in that you must take certain courses in certain order so as to understand the field. Thus it would be more difficult to convince the admission committee that you are a good fit if you have very little formal training in the field. On the other hand, fields such as biophysics, neuroscience, etc., are very interdisciplinary. Neuroscience programs, for example, will usually be happy to admit majors from math, physics, chemistry, biology, psychology and computer science, to just list a few. In this case, even if your official major is not neuroscience, your chance is not significantly worse than someone who does have a major in neuroscience (this of course also depends on your other credentials such as relevant research experience).
Another factor to consider is the structure of the Ph.D. programs in your country and in your new field. In some cases, such as biology or many European countries, you are required to select an advisor from the very beginning of the program, whereas other programs, such as in mathematics in the US, you do not have such requirements and you are admitted into the program first and select your advisor only one or two years later. In fields that require you to pick an advisor from the beginning, having a different undergrad major may be less disadvantageous if, for example, you personally know (or your advisor personally knows) the professor that you will want to work with. Alternatively, you may be better off applying to programs that do not require a specific advisor if you do not have a specific commitment in the new field.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.481718 | 2015-05-02T14:46:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44651",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Fomite",
"aparente001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/159090",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"jakebeal",
"原来的我吉他弹唱视频人山人海_闫欢个人资料五十步笑百步"
],
"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
} |
186410 | Title Page for PhD Interview Presentation
Background information: I am currently applying for various PhD programs in Mathematics. For some of them, I have to give a short presentation regarding the research proposal, which I have submitted for the application.
Now, I am currently a research assistant in the university where I did my master's degree in order to continue my work until I can start my PhD. However, my PhD applications are for other universities in slightly different topics.
My question(s):
I usually include my affiliation as well as the name and the logo of
my university on the title page, because it looks more prefessional.
Should I also do this for the PhD interview? On one hand, the
application has nothing to do with my university and currenct
academic position (I mean, I do not present anything regarding my
research, just the project on which I intend to work as a PhD
student), but on the other hand it is the place where I am currently
affilated to.
Secondly, should I include the name of my intended supervisor on the title page? For the application, it was not required to specify
your preferred supervisor, however, I am already in touch with some
professors and the proposals are the results of my discussions with them (the proposal are not binding, just required for the applications).
So, should I add a line on the title page like "intended to work
under the guidance of Prof. John/Jane Doe"? (The professors are in each case not in the committee)
(1) is OK, since you are currently working there.
(2) seems to me to be a bit presumptuous since the person you are naming has not yet accepted you. The committee will ask you about who you want to work with anyway and hopefully, your advisor in spe has already indicated this to the committee.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.482223 | 2022-06-26T14:31:18 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/186410",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
163222 | Applying for postdoctoral fellowships: priorities?
I am going to graduate with a PhD in applied math/CS in early fall (I am studying in Europe). Due to various factors, there are not too many places that would fit my previous research well enough for me not to basically have to switch fields or at least work in a research group that knows nothing about what I do. I want to mainly choose a host based on their research interests (which should mostly align with mine) and the contributions I could expect to make in a collaboration. With this in mind, there are two hosts in the US, two in Israel, and two in Japan who I am considering and where I have reasonable chances to get in either via fellowship or directly with the PI. However, there are obviously more factors I should consider, but I have too little experience to order my priorities. For example, how important is prestige of the university? The hosts in Japan are in two of the smaller and less famous universities, even though they're well respected in my field and I'd have an advantage as I know Japanese, and have many acquaintances in the area. I also like that Japan is safe and don't mind the long hours. Meanwhile, the hosts in the US are at highly prestigious universities (both Ivy League) - but try as I might, I have little enthusiasm for both places, considering I've visited there before (not the hosts though) and didn't feel comfortable. The two PIs in Israel are the ones I know the least about (their research is slightly less close to my current one), though they seem to be quite big shots. I've just heard mixed reviews of life in Israel regarding safety etc, plus my Hebrew is pretty bad and would need a serious upgrade if I want to communicate more.
My question is now how to weigh things like personal preference for a location against prestige/networking in the geographical area. If I do stick with academia, I definitely want to give myself the best chance possible, and naturally expect to have to make sacrifices for it, but considering my not-so-great PhD experience, I want to do a postdoc somewhere that appeals to me beyond prestige.
Given the state of the job market in many fields you should just apply for all of them, since it's nowhere near guaranteed you'll get any offers (this may not be true for some areas of CS at the moment).
Yeah, that's the plan anyway. My advisor is just discouraging me from attempting to go to Japan, which has been making me somewhat insecure about the whole thing (it's the most likely to succeed too from what people are telling me).
This is a highly personal question. Judging from your post you already have a pretty good understanding of the non-personal factors, but how to weigh them against personal ones such as crime or local culture is I for us to do. That's necessarily your call!
The main reasons I can think of to do a postdoc are
Continuing your research work, expanding your academic portfolio
Getting good reference letters from leaders in your field.
Expand your domain knowledge - if you are interested in a new field, a postdoc with a relevant host is an excellent way of familiarizing yourself with it.
Practice your academic faculty skills: mentoring students, writing grants etc.
I have listed these in the order of their importance (in my mind), but yours may be different.
With these considerations in mind, ask yourself which position would best facilitate these goals and what you'd need to do in order to achieve them.
From my experience, language barriers are not a major issue in Israel: most adult Israelis (especially those in the age range of 18-40, and definitely all in academia) can speak English fairly well.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.482399 | 2021-03-01T17:19:32 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/163222",
"authors": [
"astronat supports the strike",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/135726",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39510",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49043",
"schrodingerscat",
"user2705196"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
54848 | Should the desire to go back to one's country after graduation be written in the statement of purpose?
I wish to apply to public universities in the US for a PhD in the near future and at this point I am drafting my statement of purpose.
Having been exposed to how research (majority of which is public and funded by the government) is done in my country (India) from an early age and having worked in some of these research organizations myself, I was considering including a desire to be an active part of the academic community (in what capacity, I don't think I can be sure at this point) in India and possibly working to contribute to it as one of my motivations for gaining a PhD.
Given that I wish to apply majorly to public research universities (majorly funded by the governments, as I understand it) in the US, will it be perceived as not being in the interests of the university to accept a student who is keen on returning to his country following his education? Does this kind of a thing matter during the admissions procedure? Should I be thinking along these lines? How is marginal patriotism this kind of a motivation perceived in a statement of purpose?
I will be sure to mention those but I was of thinking that I would add some more philosophical motivation as well. But I will rethink that now.
This probably depends strongly on your field of study.
@GabrielC.Drummond-Cole Why do you say so? Can you please elaborate on that?
I don't think "patriotism" is the correct word here.
At least State Department would be happy to read that if they see it :)
For example, if you were studying political science, anthropology, or social theory, having a strong engagement with the discipline's issues with regard to your home country might be seen as giving you focus, bringing more diverse perspectives to your cohort, and giving the discipline more representatives outside the US.
On the other hand, physical chemistry or aeronautical engineering programs would likely not care about those factors. Maybe something somewhere in the middle is environmental engineering, where India presumably faces different challenges than the US.
@GabrielC.Drummond-Cole if you were studying political science, anthropology, or social theory If an Indian wants to study social theory about India, he probably would stay in India to study it. Going to US to study India social theory and then go back to India sounds very strange to me.
Maybe we have a different understanding of what "social theory" means in this context.
@GabrielC.Drummond-Cole My point is about social theory about India not just social theory.
I don't know much about India but I know someone who moved from Japan to the US to study Japanese folklore. I think this kind of thing might have many sources --- the draw of a marquee university (potentially including a US state school), a lack of resources of various sorts at home, a strong and well-rounded department, who knows? But I think it's more common than you seem to.
I can't imagine this making a difference at all. Why would anyone think that accepting a promising student who wants to return to their home country after graduating would not be in the best interests of the department? Once you finish your thesis, you're going to leave; why should we care which country to leave for?
As has already been mentioned, having an intention to return to your home country is critical to getting a student visa.
Depending on your wording (and to a lesser extent on your discipline), I do not think this is problematic at all. Most public universities in the US are not directly concerned with the monetary investment in their students.
Rather, they are concerned with attracting motivated, high-quality graduate students along with an undergraduate student body that contains (and serves) many students from the state but also includes students from diverse backgrounds and with different life experiences.
You do not say in your question whether you are pursuing a graduate or undergraduate degree, but I think in either case it's fine. Having a plan to return to your home country is totally understandable, and speaks to both your motivation and long-term planning.
Furthermore, admissions committees understand that while you have this plan now, that things can happen over the course of years and that you plans you outline in your statement of purpose may change.
As multiple comments and answers indicate, this should not be the main focus of your statement of purpose and does not need to be belabored.
I agree with the comment that "patriotism" is not quite the right word for your preferences, and I think using that word (or some others) would seem strange or inappropriate in your statement, but in general, expressing a desire to eventually apply the skills you will be learning in your home country should not be a problem.
TL; DR. You do not know where you would like to be after finishing your PhD.
You make several assumptions that may or not hold true.
First assumption. You will finish the PhD. As everyone in this forum knows, finishing a PhD is a long and hard process. Not everyone makes it through.
Second Assumption. You will get a job in your home country, after getting a PhD. This is even worse. The market for PhD holders is very competitive. This is why after the PhD, people may go to several countries for doing postdocs, before getting (if they will ever get) a tenure position somewhere. You cannot plan this beforehand.
Third Assumption. You will still want to go to your home country after your PhD. People change and the 3-7 years required for finishing a PhD is a long time. People may meet their significant other, get married, have kids or change their minds where or what they want to be. You cannot possibly predict how this will turn out for you.
Bottomline. In professional documents, like the SOP, provide all the necessary information you are required to provide and nothing more. Your political preferences, your religion or your love for your country is personal information and you should keep it that way. Be professional and only provide the scientific information and aspirations that is relevant to the university you apply to. Everything else, keep it to yourself.
In my experience many application guidelines specifically request that the statement of purpose include something about the student's overall career goals. It is a statement of purpose after all. There is definitely a lot of hyperbole that goes into writing many aspects of the statement, but if you left out anything about why you intend to get a PhD there wouldn't be much left in the SOP.
@BrenBarn - This is the basis of an effective Answer (which I would vote up).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.482720 | 2015-09-23T05:14:31 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/54848",
"authors": [
"Alireza Ahmadi",
"Anja",
"Anonymous math job seeker",
"BrenBarn",
"Brian Borchers",
"Cape Code",
"EddieFication",
"Fábio Papais",
"Gabriel C. Drummond-Cole",
"Hanky Panky",
"JeffE",
"Justin",
"Nijhom Rater Nillakas",
"Nobody",
"Slothworks",
"Tamer Nasser",
"aparente001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11513",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149868",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149869",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149870",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149876",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149877",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149879",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149882",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20356",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23800",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9041"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
112108 | Should I inform the journal that I'm the actual first author?
It's been about 2 years since I've left academia, partly because of the kind of deeds that I'm about to describe to give a bit of context to the question.
About a month ago I was CCed in an email exchange involving my former PhD supervisor and one of our collaborator, a Post-doc in Mathematics (from now on referred to as the Post-doc). The email said that one of our papers, that we submitted to a journal about 2 years ago (that's right) was finally rejected (better late than never I suppose).
Recently, I have received a letter from the Journal of Functional Analysis that informed me that I have been indicated as a co-author of a publication recently submitted by my former supervisor. It is of course yet another attempt to get the paper published somewhere. Although the fact that the choice of journal is a questionable one (JFA is published by Elsevier, which I would gladly boycott, but this is a whole different matter I won't get into), what startled me was the fact that the Post-doc has been indicated as First Author.
Now, a clarification about the paper is due in order to understand the situation better. Most if not all of the original draft of the paper was written by me, and it pretty much contained most of my research work, which then turned into my PhD thesis together with some later results that I have obtained. There have been times when I got stuck on some points, in which cases a few chats with my supervisor helped overcome the problems. The contributions from the Post-doc towards the final version of the paper are, to say the least, very questionable. One way to summarise them is perhaps with the expression unintentional sabotage. The Post-doc kept changing sentences in the paper because he thought we was improving it. I'm not an English native speaker and nor is the Post-doc, but his English was definitely worse than mine and, as a consequence, I had to spend hours reverting his changes, over and over again. Not to mention his competency with the mathematical content of the paper itself. A good part of the time we spent in meetings to discuss the contents at the board, it was basically me (a PhD student in Pure Math with a degree in Physics at that time) recollecting basic school maths facts (literally) for the sake of the Post-doc who didn't seem to remember them (or know them altogether).
Don't get me wrong on this though. I am in no way implying that there is an voluntary attempt at bad deeds here. Knowing my former supervisor, this is what I think it is going on with the paper submission. Given that I am no longer in academia, it benefits nobody if the paper is submitted with me as first author. Hence it would make more sense to indicate the Post-doc as first author since he is still somehow making his way in the academic world.
Whilst I would totally support this decision in general as very sensible, I find it hard to go by it in this particular case, given the scenario I have described above. By allowing the Post-doc to be first author, my former supervisor is (I believe inadvertently) helping someone to be where he's probably not supposed to be, taking the chance away from someone who is more qualified. You wouldn't believe how many successful applications the Post-doc has had, given his actual knowledge on the subject. The only explanation that I could come up with is that, somehow, people are happy to offer the Post-doc a place at their departments to enjoy of his buffoonery (possibly his only positive aspect).
Now, after this long introduction, here comes the question: Should I notify the journal that I am the actual first author?
Authors in mathematics are almost always listed alphabetically. Is that the case here?
It is, and the Post-doc would figure out first. Perhaps I should have mentioned in the OP that the journal in question asks for a First Author explicitly.
Sorry, I'm still confused. Whose name actually comes first alphabetically, yours or Postdoc's? Are there any co-authors besides you and Postdoc? Perhaps you can clarify exactly what author ordering you think should be used, and what Postdoc is proposing that is different. (And as a side comment, the question would be more concise if you left out all the stuff about Postdoc being an idiot. You were unimpressed with his contributions, we get it.)
The alphabetical order is: postdoc's name, my name, supervisor's name. The names appear in alphabetical order on the paper, but the journal explicitly asks for a first author. Currently, the postdoc has been indicated as first author.
I see. Are you sure this isn't just a misunderstanding? My experience with math journals is that they always ask for "first author", "second author", etc. But if the authors want alphabetical order, then you're expected to put the alphabetical first author in the "first author" blank, and so on. If so then Postdoc is doing it exactly right. And even if that's not what the journal intends, it could be an honest mistake on Postdoc's part.
Having never submitted a paper with JFA myself, I don't know whether you would have to enter each author separately (hence the distinction between first, second, third, ... which would reflect the alphabetical order), or if you would need to provide a list of author and then indicate the first author explicitly. The link that was sent to me in a generated email seemed to indicate that an author was specifically designated as first author. Unfortunately, I cannot find anything useful online regarding the submission process with this particular journal.
It might be informative to go through a dummy submission and see what the form looks like. I haven't submitted a multi-author paper to JFA myself, but again, my experience is that to a journal, "first author" just means "who should be listed first", nothing more. It's up to the authors to decide on their own who gets listed first, whether it be alphabetical or something else.
@NateEldredge and OP, there is no need for a dummy submission. Just look at the latest issues of the journal. In the couple of issues I looked at, all authors were listed alphabetically. I believe this confirms that the journal has no concept of a “first author” as it is understood in other parts of academia.
I'd be more annoyed, insulted, and worried about what is going on by the fact that it appears from the description that the submitting author(s) did not contact all authors before hitting the 'send' button to submit to a new journal.
You may want to return to Academia in the future so the fact that you are now working otherwise shouldn't carry a lot of weight.
You may not want to burn bridges on this. I'd actually suggest that you contact your PhD supervisor and ask for clarification. You may get an interesting reply that solves the problem or pushes you to seek a solution with the editors. I don't think that a journal will like to adjudicate a conflict and might respond by simply rejecting the paper doing no one any good. Try the most collegial approach at first and see what you learn.
If the core of your dissertation is published elsewhere, your work should stand on its own whether or not this paper is published as is or not. If it isn't yet published, then you should attend to that, of course.
Thanks for your answer. It sounds very sensible to me. My PhD thesis is deposited with the University and contains more than what's currently in the paper. In fact, further, more general results are already published in a paper of which I'm the sole author.
And does this current paper that's causing the issue, cite your thesis and especially your sole-author paper? I would say it certainly should.
I think you've misunderstood the situation. It appears to me that this is being handled properly by your co-authors, and any action on your part would be inappropriate.
As you've clarified, you and your co-authors are following the usual authorship convention for pure math, which is that authors are listed alphabetically, with the corresponding assumption that all authors contributed equally to the paper. (Of course, this is often a polite fiction, but you're on board with it now and so it doesn't behoove you to denigrate their contributions.) You say the alphabetical order here is Postdoc, RecentStudent (that's you), Supervisor.
From the journal's point of view, "first author" just means literally that: whose name should be printed first on the title page? And since you've decided to use alphabetical order, Postdoc is indeed the "first author" in that sense. So it is absolutely correct that he's identified as "first author" in the journal's paperwork. Nobody is playing any funny games here.
Any significance attached to the ordering of the authors, or who comes first, is in the minds of the authors and the readers. The journal doesn't want to get involved in the question of who is the "primary" author, or who did the most work, and they really don't care. They just want all the authors to agree on what should go on the title page, and which name should be printed first, second, third, etc. Any way is fine with them so long as the authors all approve.
If it helps, the submission form for JFA has a section that looks like this:
You click the little arrows to change the order. Note that "First Author" is automatically attached to whoever is first on the list.
You definitely should not tell the journal that you're the "actual" first author. They'll interpret this as a sign that you want to be listed first, and thus the authors are not in agreement about what should appear on the title page. They'll put the whole submission on hold until they can be assured that the three of you have worked it out. This will greatly annoy your co-authors, especially since it seems to have already been understood that alphabetical order was to be used.
If you really wanted to be listed first (i.e. out of alphabetical order), in principle you could open that discussion with your co-authors, but I think it would reflect poorly on you, especially at this late date. I don't advise that. In any case they'd have to agree. The journal won't settle such disputes for you.
As a side remark, your co-authors really should have asked you before submitting to a new journal. It sounds like it's not worth making a fuss about it now, but you might ask them politely to involve you in the journal selection process in case it needs to be done again (which is not unlikely; JFA is pretty selective). They may have assumed that, since you're no longer in academia, you wouldn't really care and would rather not be bothered - not really a valid assumption, but perhaps understandable. As for the boycott, it's a fine point to bring up in a discussion, but I think most people feel it would be poor form to insist if your co-authors don't feel the same - especially if, as in the Postdoc's case, they're at a career stage where "getting published in the best journal" has to take precedence over idealistic considerations.
@Phoenix87: No, the order in this form should match the order specified in the paper itself. I thought you said that the desired order was alphabetical. In that case, Postdoc should appear first in the paper's source and also first on this form. Did I misunderstand you?
@Phoenix87: I don't think your interpretation is correct. The journal does not have any way to specify an "actual first author". The form is to allow you the freedom to have the authors listed in a different order than alphabetical, if that is what the authors have decided. Alphabetical order is widely followed in math, but it isn't mandatory, and if the authors choose something else the journal will allow it.
I think your last comment is based on your interpretation of "First Author" in this context. One cannot be sure until one sees it written somewhere on, e.g., the website of the journal. In fact, my interpretation of "First Author" is different.
@Phoenix87: indeed your interpretations are different, but Nate Eldredge's interpretation is entirely standard for pure mathematics (and various other fields). I don't see why you think anything is different here. I took a random sample of some recently published articles in the journal, and I see nothing in any of them that indicates "First Author". They show a list of authors (in alphabetical order) and designate one of them as Corresponding Author.
In case it helps, I have published in JFA (though a solo paper); I know people who have published multi-author papers there; and I'm personally acquainted with some of the editors. I've never had any indication that their policies around authorship are anything other than the standard. And the standard is so standard in mathematics that I would expect any deviation to be widely known.
@Phoenix87 I'll add my voice to that of Nate and James. I mean no offense, but someone needs to say it explicitly: it looks very much like you are misinformed about publishing norms in math. Moreover, you seem strangely resistant to having those norms clarified to you by professional mathematicians with many publications to their name. Once again: "first author" means "author who is listed first", nothing more or less. If the authors are listed alphabetically, then the "first author" (or "actual first author", if you insist - that means exactly the same) is the one who is alphabetically first.
... And as for your beef with academia and its "funny games": I'm sorry if you had a bad experience in your PhD. Certainly not everything is perfect in academia and all sorts of weird things do happen, and if you are suspicious of your supervisor's intentions, that may well be justified given your experiences. But this has nothing to do with the issue at hand involving your question about the first author. The answer Nate gave is correct, and your skepticism on this particular issue is simply misguided. Anyway, good luck with the journal submission!
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
If it is you who obtained the central data and wrote the manuscript, there is no doubt that you should be the first author.
I think before you contact the journal, it is better to first talk with your former supervisor about your concern.
This is simply not correct in pure math.
I really do not understand, why the people made the most contribution is not eligible to be listed as the first author. When citing it, it is always First Author et al..
in my limited experience, most articles in math have few authors (two, sometimes three) and generally citations include all of them. I don't recall seeing the "et al." abbreviation in math.
@wdxueren In my experience, most citations in math are of the form "[12]", and when you go to item number 12 in the bibliography all authors are written down explicitly in alphabetical order, be they one or ten.
Also, in math there is the unspoken assumption that all authors have always contributed equally to the paper. Unrealistic as it might be, this is the 'default assumption' in math. Certainly everyone is expected to have read and approved every single word in the paper.
@DenisNardin I don’t think that’s an unspoken assumption - indeed if it were it would be unrealistic and often dramatically false. Rather, the unspoken assumptions are that 1) each author contributed enough to merit coauthorship, and 2) unless explicitly stated otherwise, the author order is alphabetical and carries no information about the relative contributions of the different authors.
@DenisNardin TBH it is always hard to judge contribution in mathematics, that's why probably we use this unspoken assumption... The nature of the math "beast" is that if one person finds 99% of a proof to a theorem, it is typically completely useless without the missing 1%. So, in some sense the 99% and the 1% alone are both worth the same: nothing. It is only together that they become something...
@wdxueren As a mathematician I never understood this obsession for people to be listed as first author. It leads to too many discussions and politics just to satisfy some ego :)
@DanRomik Fair, I guess that a more accurate representation of the feeling I have would be that the true contribution of each coauthor is unquantifiable. Like, if two people discuss at the blackboard and one babbles with the chalk for one hour and the other only rarely asks pointed questions, which contributed more to the resulting theorem? I don't know, and on some level I don't care.
@Nick S, yeah, I see it works different in Math, but in other field, first author publications are crucial for one to get hired. Many positions require at least three first author papers. SO it is so much more than "satisfy some ego"
@Denis yes, I suppose it is because of such feelings that mathematicians decided (wisely) not to play the authorship order game that the rest of academia plays. Nonetheless, often the relative contributions of the authors are in fact quantifiable. I find it disingenuous when some mathematicians become angry or upset when they are asked to detail this information (for example when being reviewed for a promotion) and hide behind the “all authors contributed equally” meme. I suspect this is due either to insecurity or wanting to protect junior coauthors who didn’t actually contribute very much.
@DenisNardin ... In any case I do agree that a lot of the time the contributions are difficult or impossible to quantify, and believe that the obsession some people/institutions have with trying to estimate such things is harmful and unhealthy (similarly to the obsession with bibliometrics in general).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.483379 | 2018-07-02T13:24:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/112108",
"authors": [
"CCTO",
"Carol",
"Dan Romik",
"Denis Nardin",
"James Martin",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Nick S",
"Phoenix87",
"Pieter Naaijkens",
"Rad80",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11564",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32274",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53234",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74339",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7624",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80631",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/86480",
"wdxueren"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
78876 | How to answer questions about whether you are taking on new doctoral students when admission is determined by a committee and a competitive process?
Because I teach at a doctoral institution, I get plenty of e-mails from prospective students asking me if I'm taking new doctoral students in the next academic year.
I'm not always sure how to answer them. Because admissions are done as a committee of the whole, I might have a student, I might not. It depends on my colleagues and on the applicant pool. I also don't want to encourage or dissuade prospective students too much either.
Do you have a phrase or response which encapsulates this complexity?
I have never been in this situation so I will not venture an answer, but here is my thought: "There may be space in my lab [group] next year. Also, I want to make sure you know about these other members of the department with related research interests to mine that you might want to take a look at (provide links). I'm sorry I don't have a more precise answer for you at this time. [name of month] would be a good time to ask again, if you are still interested."
Speaking from a student perspective, I remember emailing and asking this question because applications are freaking expensive. I didn't have a ton of money to spend, so I wanted to be strategic; if the professors whose research most intrigued me weren't interested in taking on new students, period, then I wasn't going to waste my limited funds on applying to that school.
Ah, so you want to be told no. That's a useful data point, thanks Tony.
Sometimes, even with the competitive selection, students are actually asked to contact potential advisors and then in the committee advisors are asked if there are students they would like to take. With this in mind, you could at least tell them if their interests match (or if there is no chance) or what you would say if it was your decision. Of course still tell them the actual selection process is not in your hands.
Does the admission process in your university require to find a potential advisor before applying?
@RoboKaren I wouldn't take that as students wanting to hear no. I feel that your comment was a bit snarky. In any case, you would be surprised by the number of students who actually don't have the money to apply to many schools. Is it fair of us to ask whether or not it would be a waste of money to apply? Yes, yes it is.
@ChrisCirefice - I didn't mean to sound snarky. I was serious. Even if I know a student doesn't have a serious chance, I don't want to be discouraging - especially when I don't know them well. I've been worrying about hurting their feelings, but knowing that finances are a concern helps mitigate that concern.
@RoboKaren I get that, but it sounded like you were discriminating students based on their financial situation, using it as a sort of excuse to dismiss them. "Oh, you're a decent applicant but if you're concerned about money don't bother because you have only a slight chance of being accepted"; that's kinda what I heard, but I get that that wasn't your intention :)
@ChrisCirefice - Faculty have no way of telling if a grad prospie is a trust-fund-baby or is on Medical. We don't get their financial aid documents - in all the programs I've been on, we've been need-blind.
@RoboKaren Ah, that makes sense. Changes thins a little bit doesn't it?
You give one of the two possible answers:
No, I am not taking on doctoral students.
Yes, I am interested in taking on doctoral students but who actually gets a place is decided by the admissions committee, not by me.
+1: As per tonsydg's comment, I think this would have been the most useful set of answers for me.
Agreed - I think there's an important distinction to draw between the professor taking graduate students and the department taking graduate students. In departments I've experienced, it's definitely been a two-stage process. First you get accepted to the graduate program, and then (after rotations) you get accepted to a particular lab/adviser. So there's certainly a place to say "I am taking students, but you'll have to get accepted by the department first."
I explain that admissions decisions are made by committee and encourage the student to apply. No matter how strong or weak the prospective student is, the decision is not mine to make.
As to whether or not I'll agree to advise a particular student, I'll make that decision after I've interacted with the student in person.
In my department, no PhD student is admitted without at least one faculty member declaring their willingness in principle to advise the student. That isn't a permanent advising commitment, but rather insurance against strong students being admitted and then never finding anyone to work with because their interests don't match the faculty's interests.
I answer truthfully either "yes" or "no". Whether or not I am taking students cannot affect whether applicants are accepted, but it can affect whether or not they choose to attend my institution; so I feel it's important to be honest.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.484821 | 2016-10-27T01:34:33 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/78876",
"authors": [
"Brian Borchers",
"Chris Cirefice",
"JeffE",
"R.M.",
"RoboKaren",
"aparente001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15360",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22409",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36315",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41843",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"skymningen",
"svavil",
"tonysdg",
"user812786"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
20270 | Is verbatim copying several paragraphs of text with citation considered plagiarism?
Is it plagiarism if I copy several paragraphs from another's source (let's say a CS paper) into my work and then footnote Source: ..., for example, as background information?
As others have pointed out, it's not clear why you need to copy several paragraphs from a paper into your work. Is it background motivation, or a proof, or a long argument chain, or.... ?
Don't. Just don't.
@Suresh As a way to save time when giving background information.
I don't think that's a reasonable argument for copying large swathes of material.
@JeffE Is it distasteful? illegal?
@SimonKuang you don't need to include that much background information in academic papers. If you are writing a textbook, you should explain it independently.
So long as it is obvious that it is another's work then it is not plagarism. However, depending on the amount copied and a lot of other factors, it may be a copyright violation, and it may break other rules of your school/journal/whatever. Or simply be marked down by your examiners/reviewers, unless there's a good reason for such extensive quotation.
+1 A cited large block quote may generally not be plagiarism, but often it will still not be appreciated at all by teachers or reviewers (for different reasons).
@xLeitix The classic absurd example of copying an entire other paper and quoting it is not plagarism. But it will get you zero credit..
I would be surprised if this caused a copyright issue, as I think this would almost always fall under fair use. The shortest example I know of a quote for which a court rejected fair use as it was "too substantial" was from Ford's biography, and that was over 600 words.
@alex becker : you're being US-centric. :-) But also, while I don't know much about fair use, I imagine it may depend not just in the length but the purpose & context of the quoting? Hence the "lot of other factors" that I mentioned.
@SimonW Indeed I am being US-centric! That's my fault for forgetting not everyone lives here. In response to purpose and context: I'm assuming that OP would be quoting the result in a research article, which pretty much automatically meats all the criteria of US fair use except "too substantial".
@alex becker ah, right. Sounds like a generous provision. Allow me to envy just that little component of your copyright system ;-)
@SimonW Fair use is indeed one of the best aspect of US copyright law. However, I am not a lawyer and my remarks should of course be taken with a grain of salt.
The original author owns two things:
the ideas in their work, and
the language they used to convey those ideas.
Plagiarism occurs when you use either without proper attribution. If you paraphrase another author's ideas in your own words (i.e., use #1 only) then you need a citation. If you copy verbatim another author's words (i.e., use #1 and #2) then you need to put the copied text in quotes and include a citation.
Generally if you are quoting the original author's language then the way that the author communicated their ideas is part of the argument you are making in your article. If this is not the case then it is better to paraphrase, since your reader will be expecting some discussion of the original author's language and changes in tone can be distracting to the reader.
In your specific case, it sounds like paraphrasing would be more appropriate.
Another thing to consider, even if you correctly quote and cite the source, it may still be considered a form of plagiarism if
1) A signification portion of the paper is made up of quotes (especially 1 quote).
2) There is no original research presented in the paper.
3) If the quote itself provides significant argument towards your point, and you fail to add your own supporting arguments.
I would not call it plagiarism in that case, since there is no intention to deceive (just a very poor quality paper and a possible copyright violation).
I agree with @Peter. Merriam-Webster defines plagiarism as "to use the words or ideas of another person as if they were your own words or ideas." Clearly, if someone correctly quotes and cites the source, anyone considering this any form of plagiarism is redefining the word.
Copying verbatim a paragraph or more of research is considered plagiarism. When more than two words in a row are used from the source that is considered plagiarism. It probably would be better to change it up by extensively paraphrasing through synonyms, etc.
The "more than two words in a row" rule is a myth. And paraphrasing does not cure plagiarism; a citation is still required to acknowledge the source of the ideas.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.485601 | 2014-05-05T03:13:09 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20270",
"authors": [
"Alex Becker",
"Ben Voigt",
"BobRodes",
"Cruncher",
"Flyto",
"JeffE",
"Paul de Vrieze",
"Peter Bloem",
"Simon Kuang",
"Spammer",
"Suresh",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10183",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12678",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14406",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14910",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/183411",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/541",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6936",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8705",
"xLeitix"
],
"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
} |
11497 | Is starting with the abstract and conclusion an efficient reading approach for writing a literature review?
I'm writing a literature review at the moment. I have many many papers to read and I don't have that much time (just one month).
What I do is reading the abstract and then the conclusion and from the conclusion I see what were the key findings and then look them up in the paper and see some details.
Is that good way or should I read them cover to cover?
It is different question.
The essence of that question (depth vs. breadth) is the same as this one (skim vs cover-to-cover). Additionally, the two top answers at the linked question answer this questions also. The added context of writing a lit. review is not enough to make this question distinct.
A question about strategies to write lit. reviews in short time periods would be a different question, and might provide answers closer to what the OP wants.
Your strategy sounds sound to me. You cannot read the papers from end to end. You need to weed out they papers you will possibly need in your review with as little effort as possible. Title and abstract should be enough. Once you have done this you should be left with a bunch of papers that are likely to be of use to you. While you have looked through them you must also consider how the material can be organized. There are many ways of doing this, chronological order (boring), thematic order (are there subfields?), contradictions (are there compeeting ideas) etc. The point is to try to get the information organized. You need some form of organization fo the papers so that you know how you will treat them in your review.
Once you have found all papers you think you need you can start assembling the information into your text. It is at this point you can start reading them in more detail. It is still not necessary to read every detail. you need to focus on the background to the different conclusions drawn.
The goal of the review should be to provide a new perspective on the field you have chosen so your own familiarity with the field (papers) is key. Try to collect as many as you can; not all will be used.
I fill the following template for each article I read. Some of them I fill only partially at first, to potentially come back later if I interested in spending more time. I found that noting the plan was taking little time and helping enough to be worth doing during the first read.
**** Reference for Humans
**** Abstract
**** Bibtex
#+BEGIN_SRC bibtex
#+END_SRC
**** Index Terms
**** Plan
**** Definitions
**** Results
**** Algorithms
**** Questions
**** Summaries
***** By Authors
***** By me
**** My Notes
Hope it helps!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.486123 | 2013-07-29T16:53:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11497",
"authors": [
"Ben Norris",
"EBS",
"Gaurav Saxena",
"Manu",
"Raul Laasner",
"Saqqaf",
"Semsem",
"daredadevil",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28746",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28747",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28748",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28750",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28763",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28771",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7382",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/924"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
72963 | Is copying paragraph structure plagarism?
While helping a friend with a research assignment (basically find some studies on a topic, compare them, and then evaluate the work as a whole), I noticed that the professor had provided a sample paper.
They had one paragraph for every study, and they were all in the same exact format. For example:
[Authors] conducted a [type of study] to investigate [phenomena]. The
study was conducted at [institution] and involved [N] [types of
people]. The strengths of this study were [...] etc.
Is it plagiarism to copy this exact format? Or is the structure of paragraphs not something to worry about?
I would ask the professor. Using the format might be mandatory, or it might be a bad example.
I usually study the structure of papers before trying to write them when working with different people/fields/subfields. Easier for someone to work with you if you match their style. I really believe it to be a good idea. However, I, personally, don't really like that specific formula you described, rather bland, but if it is common in the field use it, because it will ease the understanding of your content for readers/reviewers.
It's not "plagiarism" because you are copying a standard format. That is known as scenes a faire in fiction, but can apply to Academia. This is not only allowed, but encouraged, because you are conforming to a "formula."
You should be worried if you were copying an unusual or original format. That's not the case here.
Why not have an introductory paragraph that says the format of the summaries is taken from the example paper.
This intro could also say what papers where chosen and why.
I am not sure of the question exactly, but there are "standards" for writing academic papers.
This is the standard way of reporting studies, but use the primary source rather than the secondary source.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.486404 | 2016-07-18T11:44:47 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/72963",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Bharat Poudel",
"Charlie Dobbs",
"Fábio Dias",
"Hannah Jones",
"Holly Karr",
"Mary Jennings",
"Temidayo Akinreni",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/205717",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/205718",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/205719",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/205725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/205771",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/205824",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/205944",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41208",
"東川朋子"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
29018 | How to remove gender bias from an academic job search?
I overheard some professors discussing the next round of hiring at my university and several were concerned about gender bias possibly playing an issue in the hiring process. An initial thought is to just go through CV's and black out an applicant's name. However, an academic job search makes it much more difficult to do this. Not only do applicants have CV's, but there are also typically 3 letters of recommendations as well as publication lists (which might reveal the identity of an individual if the paper is known by some of the hiring panel).
Some suggestions that were thrown out involve trying to find a way to scan through 2-300 applicant materials and black out/replace gender pronouns and names. From browsing StackOverflow, there is apparently quite a bit of difficulty with this from a programming perspective. Still, it seems the most efficient way to remove as much gender bias as possible in the process but doesn't seem to be widely used.
What are some of the best ways a hiring panel can remove gender bias from the application process?
This question could also potentially extend to ways to generally remove other forms of bias, such as ethnic bias.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
Bias exists at many points of the hiring process. You suggested blinding the search committee to applicant gender but, as you point out, this is extremely difficult to do perfectly and completely broken by even small failures. For obvious reasons, blinding will also not be particularly relevant after you start interviewing candidates. I like the other suggestions to provide training to sensitize the committee to issues of gender bias.
Beyond that — and if your university policies allow it — you might also decide now (i.e., before the search) to interview at least one male and at least one female candidate. This way, you will give the best male and female candidates a full chance to convince you that they are right for your department. This ensures that at the top person of each gender makes it through the earlier stages of the process where gender bias may very well play its biggest role. At the interview stage, blinding would not have worked anyway.
This kind of policy is unusual but not unheard of. The most famous example I know if is the Rooney Rule in the US National Football League which requires that all teams interview minority candidates for head coaching and senior football operation jobs. Although this is sometimes cited as an example of affirmative action, it does not mandate any preference or quota to candidates within the pool of those being interviewed. If you're doing it right, it does mean that the very best candidates from under-represented groups will always have an opportunity to show their stuff at the final round.
If you found out that best person from the under-represented groups is really not as good as the best person from the over-represented group, at least you'll know that you gave the best member from each group a full hearing.
Update: I will point out that this answer basically assumes that all of your candidates will present as either male or female. As a result, is it very limited in the case of non-gender conforming candidates. These candidates may also be subject to even greater discrimination and this approach will not solve (and could even aggravate) those problems.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
One simple and extremely effective step is to start tracking metrics on the candidate pool at every stage of the process.
Let's say you're looking at how your department hires assistant professors. Then you might track:
What percentage of Ph.D. holders in the field are women?
What percentage of the applications you receive are from women?
What percentage of the short-listed candidates are women?
What percentage of the interviewed candidates are women?
What percentage of the offers made are to women?
What percentage of the accepted offers are taken by women?
What percentage of the professors who advance toward tenure are women?
Now you've got actual data on what your pipeline looks like and can look for where the leaks are. If the fraction of females in the pool changes significantly at any particular stage, then that's where to focus your energy. Likewise, if the base fraction in the field is lower than you want in your institution, you can use your metrics to decide where to try to enrich the pool with good candidates. Obviously, the same approach can be applied for other disadvantaged groups as well.
I personally think this type of approach is a critical addition to the toolbox of addressing bias, because it lets you scientifically study your institution's process. You may discover things that surprise you. For example, the colleagues who I learned about this from discovered that the later stages of the hiring pipeline they were dealing with were actually OK, but that the percentage of women applying in the first place was much lower than the percentage of women in the field. That meant (to everybody's surprise) that the problem was primarily in the way that positions were being advertised and recruited for, rather than in the interviews themselves, and so
that was the process that fixes were targeted at.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
I think there are two approaches. The approach your question focuses on is blinding of the panel to the gender of the applicant. Doing this, may actually increase gender bias. By blinding the search panel to the gender of the applicant, it becomes very difficult for things like maternity leave to be taken into consideration. The better way to remove, or limit gender bias, is to provide training to the search panel about gender bias in academia and help them become aware of any biases they might have.
No, but if maternity leave is mentioned/implied anywhere, gender becomes explicit, doesn't it. How are they still blinded then? Rest of the answer, I agree. :)
@New_new_newbie that is my point. In order to blind the panel to gender you need to strip out things like maternity leave.
I am curious about how maternity leave would be visible in such an application. There is certainly no way to see it in the various applications I have sent (and I am not sure what sort of thing I could logically add that would make it visible).
If there is a one-year gap in your academic work, I suppose somebody might infer maternity leave from it.
@TobiasKildetoft If you took maternity leave and that resulted in a funding, publication, or employment gap you would probably be well served mentioning it in your cover letters and having your letter writers mention it. If there was no gap, then you might be better off leaving it out because of the biases in the system.
@Joe Z.: And if you are of any gender and just spent a year at the beach, then you might benefit unfairly from such a presumption.
I was thinking that you wouldn't want the committee thinking about future maternity leave, not maternity leave that has already happened and might have impacted research/degree progress.
A way to implement gender neutral CVs for the first round of selection would be to ask applicants to give a preliminary gender neutral file along their full application. This short CV would be asked to contain only information that does not permit to guess the gender of the applicants, at least not easily (e.g. publication lists with names replaced by the number of author and the position of the applications, etc.)
This can only be used to a very first round of selection, and letters of recommandation would have to be only used in the subsequent round, or the recommandants should be asked to make them gender neutral and without the name of the applicant.
How would you handle a publication gap due to maternity leave with this system?
@StrongBad: well, you could allow the possibility to mention maternity and health problem related leaves, with enabling to discriminate between the two kinds. In any case, this answer is not a complete answer to the question, but a mere way to by pass the computational issue of neutralizing CVs. It obviously has the same flaws as the method suggested in the question, except that it is doable.
@Physics-Compute the difference between acceptable or not is in fact the consequences are different. For example, in my field there are new investigator grants that have limits on the number of post phd years, but acceptable gaps, like maternity leave, do not count.
As a former programmer, I can confirm that it would be quite difficult to do this purely in a programmatic way. Take my name, for example. From my name, you can probably guess that I am male. If you had a computer program looking at my resume, how would you remove the word "Evan"? Keep in mind that it's easy for a human to know that that's my name, but difficult for a computer to know. Computers are very fast, but also dumb - they'll do exactly what you tell them to do, no more, and no less. Sometimes this is problematical with programming when whet you're telling them isn't what you think you're telling them, but that's another discussion entirely.
If you want a truly blind resume / cover letter / letter of recommendation review, you'd need either a manual approach needing humans who aren't involved with the hiring committee and won't report what they saw to black out the names and the pronouns used in all of these documents. Ideally, they'd be retyped with gender neutral terms such as "that person" instead of "he / she", so you won't have someone trying to squint under a blacked out ink trying to read it. People are curious - it'll happen if you let them.
There's also a hybrid approach: use computers do to the easy part, and people do the hard part. The easy part would be getting rid of all the he / she / him / her words in documents and replacing them with a gender neutral word / phrase of your choosing. The hard part would be doing the same thing with names.
The reason this is hard for computer is simple: how does the computer program doing the parsing know that what it's seeing is a name? It doesn't, unless you have some way of telling it. In an ideal world, word documents or PDFs would have metadata with a field clearly identifying that this is a name, but I doubt such a feature exists - at least in Word. PDFs probably do support this, but again, whether or not Adobe Acrobat supports this isn't the issue, but rather the issue is whether or not the appropriate metadata is embedded in the document.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.486650 | 2014-09-26T02:09:58 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/29018",
"authors": [
"299792458",
"Adip Jhaveri",
"Anon",
"Benoît Kloeckner",
"CWCorrea",
"Irineu",
"Iryna Kryvda",
"Joe Z.",
"Julio Souza",
"Kyle S.",
"Mark Petereit",
"Momo Xie",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Phi Dao",
"StrongBad",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"Yousef Gamal",
"Yuval Efron",
"ascu",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17534",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5647",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6980",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79270",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79271",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79272",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79281",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79316",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79364",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79376",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79390",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79670",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81540",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81563",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81937",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82954",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/946"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
182139 | How to send a follow up email for postdoc position
I passed the interview for a postdoc position some weeks ago, and the department asked me for various documents so they could begin the mandatory background/references check. I sent in the files pretty quickly (~2 weeks ago), but did not receive any confirmation that they got my email, or any kind of follow up. My references also did not get a call. I assume the international background check part is what's taking so long, since I am very sure that my documents must have been in order (I was very careful in preparing them).
However, I need to decide between this offer and another one this week, and in order to make this decision, I need to see the details of the actual offer they will have for me. I already negotiated a starting date and some other things with the administration, but I'll need to see the proposed contract to be able to compare to the other one. How do I politely ask for an update without annoying anyone or sounding pushy?
Please clarify your specific problem or provide additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it's hard to tell exactly what you're asking.
If you want information you need to ask. It isn't being pushy unless you do it constantly/frequently.
Ask for an update. Are there missing documents? Are all necessary sign-offs in place? Is there anything I can help with? When might I expect to see a formal offer?
But, there is little to be gained unless you have other options or need certain information in order to make necessary decisions. If it is nothing more than reassurance you seek, then you can probably wait.
Thank you for your reply! Yeah, I wouldn't usually ask just for reassurance, but since my other offer expires at the end of this week, I need some kind of guarantee from them (the lack of a formal offer of course also means that I cannot yet be 100% sure that I can fall back on this job, so there is a bit too much uncertainty for me right now).
"I need to see the details of the actual offer they will have for me."
No you don't. The contract as a postdoc is almost standard, it is also so short in time (how long do you plan to be a postdoc?) that the average postdoc wage in country X, which can be translated as "enjoying life in country X", will be always enough.
When accepting a postdoc position, think about planning the next step, because it is the most enjoyable moment in a researcher life, but it is also extremely short.
To be honest, I do, because this is not a standard postdoc offer, and has some conditions I need to see. I do not sign contracts I don’t know, and I do not reject other offers based on what I assume to be true. Weighing one against the other is impossible for me right now.
Ok, then please consider that it will not be the professor (or your future boss) that will decide on these non-standard conditions, because they are bound by their internal rules as well, so you have not to worry in being pushy, just contact/stalk HR because the issue is in their hands and not in the hands of your future boss.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.487478 | 2022-02-08T15:59:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182139",
"authors": [
"Community",
"EarlGrey",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/-1",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128758",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/135726",
"schrodingerscat"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
17483 | Should you list acceptance of an abstract to a prestigious conference on CV when unable to attend due to personal reasons?
I've been just had an abstract accepted to one of the top conferences in my field, but I'm cancelling my participation for personal reasons (short story: my wife is going to give birth to our first child a couple of weeks before the conference, and at that point I'd rather stay at home than spend several days in a different continent; this happened because I neglected to check the actual conference dates when I submitted the abstract; let that be a lesson for all of us). When I informed the organizers, they suggested that I still should add the conference to my CV, with an indication that I didn't actually present, i.e., under "Peer-reviewed conferences", I would write something like:
"A genius solution to an insanely difficult problem". Conference Everybody Wants To Attend XXIV, May 2014, Prestigious American University (unable to present).
What are your thoughts about this? If the organizers hadn't said anything, I would have left it out of my CV; but then, the particular organizer I corresponded with is a big name in the field and way more senior than I am, and she didn't seem to have any problems with it.
Is this a conference in a field like computer science, where conference publication counts, or a conference in a field like mathematics, where it doesn't ?
The custom in this field is that a talk and its corresponding proceedings paper get listed independently of each other (one as a talk, the other as a publication), but abstracts don't get listed as publications at all. That's why, if I list this one item, I have to list it under "peer-reviewed talks".
Is it an option to have a colleague present the paper for you? I mean, part of the 'deal' of the conference is that the attendees get to hear the details of your genius solution to an insanely difficult problem.
As it is a peer-reviewed conference, I think it is OK to mention it the CV.
I am not sure about your particular conference, but in such conferences the biggest step is to get accepted (extended abstract/paper) and you did. So you did the job, they liked your idea and in normal situation you would present there.
It can happen that you are not able to present and you cannot find anyone to do it for you. However, you met all the requirements to be there, so it has its place in your CV.
If you want to be more correct you can mention the abstract as well because not everybody can know if the abstract or whole paper is required.
"A genius solution to an insanely difficult problem". Conference
Everybody Wants To Attend XXIV, May 2014, Prestigious American
University (accepted abstract, unable to present)
I am not sure that it is a good idea. Firstly, it draws attention to your lack of preparation (however understandable). Secondly, it was never presented (however acceptable the organisers found it), and Thirdly, you did not even attend. It is meritable that you succeeded in getting accepted (& should re-direct the paper to another similar conference), by your CV shows 'where you have been & what you have done', & you did not complete the journey.... do you want to draw attention to this? You should treat being accepted as a personal success, but adding a caveat to something that was never presented is (IMO) not recommended. Your CV mentions actual activities and formal achievements, and although being accepted is an achievement in itself, it is taking part & delivering the information to others that is of note. I would leave it off & submit the good work you have done elsewhere.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.487758 | 2014-02-27T08:45:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17483",
"authors": [
"Ajay Raghava",
"Koldito",
"MaryAnn Popper Hardy",
"Mr.sonj",
"Paul",
"Peteris",
"Suresh",
"exsonic01",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10730",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12314",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130395",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130398",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47178",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47179",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47185"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
17362 | How to get letter of recommendation from current advisor if transferring PhD to another university for family reasons?
I've been in engineering PhD for 6 months and now considering transferring to another university. The reason is not academic, but family -- I'm in a long distance relationship with my boyfriend. We're both serious about this relationship and plan to get married. However if I keep doing my PhD in my current university, we'll be separated for many years
I am considering transferring my PhD to university closer to him. My questions are:
Should I contact the potential future advisor first before telling my boss I'm leaving?
When should I talk to current advisor and how (focus on my family reason?)
Is it possible to get his letter of recommendation, or I'll screw up this relationship entirely?
will it possible to transfer to an university better than my current one? (honestly getting to a higher place is not my purpose, believe or not, but around my BF's place are almost all very good universities (1 tier higher than my current one), which actually refused me when I applied them last time. So I'm very concerned if I could be able to enter them now)
One thing that comfort me is that because I work hard, my current advisor seems have good impression on me. But I don't know whether this will help. If anyone have any ideas, would you share your suggestion?
I am in the exact situation as you, see the other question I asked. The problem I have is that I am currently doing research on exactly what I want, and I am afraid that transferring to another program I will be more of a compromise on research but I will be closer to home. A big dilemma.
@user4050 Thanks for your comment. Yes I saw your question as well. It's always better morally to be telling the truth at the first place. Actually it will be easier as well. However, I'm really not sure whether this will work out. It's a big thing anyway.
No, only after talking with your advisor. 2. Now! 3. Yes. (If it screws up your relationship, good riddance.) 4. Maaaaybe.
Yes, your advisor should be understanding. If a student I was working with wanted to leave, I would definitely try to help them. If your advisor holds this against you, maybe it's good you found out only 6 months in?
@JeffE Thank you for sharing your experience. I decide to talk to my advisor first.
@LevReyzin You're right. I'm now assembling my thoughts, and plan to talk to him in one or two weeks. Hope we can cooperatively make things work.
I did this. I moved to a higher-tier department that had previously rejected me, after two years in my first PhD program, to be close to my SO. My former advisor and the other faculty in my research area were nothing but helpful and understanding.
The sooner you talk to your current advisor the better. The last thing you want to happen, no matter how friendly and understanding your advisor, is for someone to ask him "So why is Jae leaving?" before he knows you're thinking of leaving.
Be honest and direct. Keep in mind that you are asking for help—which is your advisor's job—not for permission to leave. Try to bring your advisor in as a collaborator in your move. Reassure him that you will finish whatever tasks are still on your plate, and that you are willing to help choose, train, and/or mentor your replacement if his thinks that would be appropriate. (Follow through.) Try to leave doors open for future collaboration, either through visits or remotely.
Finally, ask for a strong letter of recommendation, and for suggestions for potential advisors to contact. Since your target schools have already rejected you, you need strong evidence of excellence beyond your undergraduate record. Your current advisor is the strongest source of that evidence; people will take his letter very seriously. Conversely, not having a letter from your current advisor will raise a red flag.
Finally, if you can pick up a master's degree before you leave, that will raise fewer eyebrows when people look at your CV in the future.
Thank you for sharing your story! I've had an master before starting this PhD. I asked my master's advisor for advice, and he gave the same suggestion as you gave. It could be hard, but I'm feeling much better now. Hope all the best with you!
If your advisor is generally an emotionally sane person, he should be able to understand your position. If your advisor is not, you're better off finding out as early as possible, and then to run.
That said, the right time to talk to your supervisor is right now, for two primary reasons:
As you're working in a lab, it is quite likely that your supervisor would want to hire a replacement for you, which takes time.
Your supervisor may have contacts to the relevant universities, and be able to help you moving.
When it comes to what to talk about, there are two important aspects besides your wish to be closer to your family:
You'll want to reassure him that you are not leaving unfinished things around. Wrap up your experiments as far as possible before you leave, and be available to work on manuscripts after you're gone, too.
Do you plan to take your thesis topic with you? If so, you probably should discuss intellectual ownership with your advisor. Even if you feel it was your idea, he may disagree.
Finally, is there any risk that your current lab has some "secret techniques" that you'd "hand over" to the competition? If so, try to address potential concerns.
Thank you so much!! Very helpful. To add some details of my situation: 1) I just started to shape my thesis topic, and am now in a transition period that a graduating student is tranfering some of his skills to me. Besides, I'm not live on RA yet, still on program fellowship. So yes I hope to make it happen before I get more involved into the program, and before my boss pays me. 2) I'm not planning to bring my thesis topic with me, and as you suggested, I should make it clear I won't disclose intellectual property of the lab.
One thing troubling me at this moment, is, shall I go to talk to him right away without searching or contacting for potential supervisor in other university, or shall I get in touch with other faculty first? The latter seems not respectful to him, but I'm afraid I'll screw the relationship and have to leave the lab without any plan B. Painful.
Academia is a very small world. If you do ask around for advisors elsewhere, there is a decent chance that your current advisor hears about - and even generally reasonable people could react cross if they hear from a third party that their PhD student is searching for a new advisor. Judging from your addition, it seems that your advisor hasn't invested too much into you, so I don't think you have much reason to fear. I do assume here that your advisor is say well-known for choleric outbursts or other emotional instability. All the best for your efforts!
Thank you! You're right. maybe I should trust more my advisor. I should be more optimistic about my luck as I always meet good people.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.488092 | 2014-02-24T16:20:58 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17362",
"authors": [
"A. Wong",
"Arno",
"Arturo Torres Sánchez",
"GnomeSort",
"Herman Toothrot",
"JeffE",
"Lev Reyzin",
"Poplol",
"Priidu Neemre",
"Shoaib Hussain",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12047",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4050",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46819",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46820",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46821",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46828",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46870",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46871",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46927",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"ringo de kroon",
"specialk1st"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
26549 | Do advisors allow their postdocs to pursue projects outside the advisor's core interests?
I would like to work with a professor in my field as a postdoc after I complete my PhD in Computer Science later this year, who has a remarkable record of supervising PhD students to become faculty at research universities. If I get hired, is he going to oversee me to pursue my most interested project, which is in a different subfield from what he is working on currently, or to carry out his projects? If the former, Why would he hire me as a postdoc then? Just train me to be an independent research even though it may not advance his projects directly?
Related: Should postdocs work only on the projects they are hired for, or can they work with other people in the same research group on other projects?, Collaborating with professors other than the advisor, What is expected of a postdoc?
This is one of those questions that simply cannot be answered in generality. Sometimes, one hires a postdoc to do exactly this one thing that needs to be done. In that case, it will be rather difficult to spend too much time on your own projects. In other cases, one hires a postdoc simply because the funding is there, without a very specific research goal in mind. In these cases, working mostly on your own things may be fine with the professor.
I advise you to clarify with your potential employer. (however, be prepared that he or she might upsell the actual level of individual research that you will be able to do - maybe it is a good idea to also chat with other postdocs in the same group)
If the former, Why would he hire me as a postdoc then? Just train me to be an independent research even though it may not advance his projects directly?
There is actually good reasons to hire postdocs that are not exactly in your field. They open up new research directions for your lab. They allow you to publish papers that you couldn't have written on your own. They strengthen the teaching portfolio of your lab, at least if postdocs routinely teach. All in all, your lab then has expertise in an area that it did not have expertise in before.
I, for instance, traditionally work on topic A. Recently I moved to a research group that is very strong in the quite different topic B. The motivation of the lab head there was simple - he participated in a project on the intersection of A and B. He knows how to do B, he needed somebody that knows how to do A. Our (informal) deal is that I am to spend some amount of time (less than 50%, realistically) on the joint project, the rest of the time I am to teach and develop my own research agenda within our lab - which conveniently is also in the intersection of A and B, although a somewhat different direction than the joint project. I think that this setup is actually quite beneficial, both to our lab and me personally.
Edit: a word of caution, though - I have also seen professors who are not in favor of independent research within their lab at all. So don't assume that because it seems to work for me, it definitely will work for you as well. People differ.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.488725 | 2014-07-30T01:37:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26549",
"authors": [
"KarlKastor",
"Ly Phung",
"Mad Jack",
"Rubixred",
"Seke Keretsu",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71141",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71142",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71151",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71163",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71202",
"ivan kirvej",
"mov0021"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
23203 | How to get an advisor to finish their part of a publication when they have not done anything on it for over a year?
I graduated from a reputed North American university with a master's degree in 2013. Due to severe personal problems (deaths/illness in the family, war-torn homeland, divorce, financial issues, and so on), it would be fair to say that I did not perform well. My thesis had a critical error which was duly pointed out during my defense by my examiner. My advisor had not noticed it before. I managed to pass but with major corrections to the thesis.
While I was waiting for the situation in my home country to settle down, we improved the results significantly. We wrote much of a paper with the agreement that we would correspond over email when I go back home to finish it and send it for publication.
This was a year and a half ago. I am back home and I have been trying to get her to finish writing her part but to no avail. Once every couple of months she responds with "I need more time" but that's about it. It would be a huge help in my career to have a paper published. But I am paranoid about being rude to her and keep nagging her because I need her reference if and when I decide to apply for a PhD later. Also I believe she's a genuinely a nice person! So my questions are,
Is a year and a half a normal amount of time to write on a paper in
which the research is finished?
How do I politely convince her to hurry up?
She is taking too long. Attempt to write her portion of the manuscript for her, then send it to her for review.
@user11192: I did. She says, "it needs improvement and I need more time to fix it"
Ugh, how frustrating!
Is a year and a half a normal amount of time to write on a paper in which the research is finished?
No, this paper should've been finished a year ago.
The research is done, so you are not waiting for something else to fall into place for your paper. You already tried writing your former advisor's portion of the manuscript to no avail. Your former advisor did not even catch a critical flaw in your thesis. I hate to say it, but it sounds like your former advisor is quite a bozo.
How do I politely convince her to hurry up?
If you've not already done so, send your former advisor your "final" draft of the manuscript (including the parts you wrote for her). Give her a timeline for returning suggestions/modifications to you. If that doesn't work, you might have to get on the phone and talk to her about how important it is for you to submit this paper. If this fails, you may need to move on, and hope that at some point in the next year or two that she finally matures enough to help you out.
In reference to the second point, it would help if you could give her an external reason for speeding things up. You need to publish the paper for a job application, or at least submit it, and so on... Sometimes that can act as a forcing function: academics work best on deadline.
Thank you for your response. @Suresh: I do need the paper submitted to help a job application and I told her that. I did not write the whole story in the question as it started to seem like a rant. I will try calling her (again).
One bit of further advice then is to give her specific tasks ("edit section 1") and a deadline "by friday or else I'll edit it myself", and so on.
Thanks again for your responses. Keeping my fingers crossed
I guess your advisor is not really "procrastinating", just not working on your paper for one reason or another. She may very well be working on other things.
Now, of course the interesting question is why she is ignoring the work on your paper. Some potential reasons that come to mind:
She simply is swamped with teaching or administrative matters
The paper is outside of her research interest
The paper is still too much work
She thinks that the results of the paper are not very strong, and she honestly does not give the paper good chances of acceptance / impact
You say she is a "genuinely nice" person. In my experience, all too often this also implies some avoidance of confrontation (I am certainly guilty of that), which makes the third and the fourth reason more likely. Yes, in theory she should simply tell you when she thinks that material is too weak or the current draft too bad, but for her the "easier" out might be to ignore the paper, especially since you are far away.
Edit: the fact that your advisor apparently did not even read / check your thesis carefully (and missed a critical flaw) rather indicates the second reason.
As for what you should do I agree with user11192 - after such a long time, it is time to essentially give up on getting her to do "her part". Write it for her, and send it to her only for review. Since it has become abundantly clear that the paper is not a priority for her right now (for whatever reason), you can either do it alone or not do it at all. You have no leverage over your old advisor to get her to do her part, especially if you are afraid of burning any bridges.
Thank you for your response. I totally agree with the part about having no leverage over my old advisor. The helplessness is killing me!
But there is help. Do it yourself!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.489017 | 2014-06-10T19:16:38 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23203",
"authors": [
"Anonymous",
"ArtEze",
"Dhurgham Mohammed",
"Hamza L.",
"Lifu Huang",
"Luis F Llano",
"Mad Jack",
"Suresh",
"crypton480",
"dmb",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11731",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62015",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62016",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62034",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62038",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62095",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
34464 | Should I offer to pay (some of) the travel cost from the UK to the US for an interview?
I'm applying for tenure track jobs this year, and unfortunately the silence from universities I've applied to has been almost deafening so far. While I'm sure there are several factors contributing to this, one concern that has been nagging me comes from the fact that I am currently finishing up a postdoc in England, and I've been applying to North American institutions exclusively. My questions are:
Would the potentially high cost of flying me to an interview lead to some institutions passing me over?
If so, would it help if I offer in the cover letter to (at least partially) pay my way?
I am concerned because I feel that by far my best chances are for positions at smaller liberal arts schools or state colleges. My guess is that these types of institutions may have smaller search budgets than so-called R1 universities, and really for the cost of interviewing me they could interview two or three equally qualified people who live nearby.
At the risk of making this question too localized, I should mention that I am working under a very generous grant with a substantial research expense budget, and so the cost wouldn't necessarily be out of my own pocket, assuming I can give a research talk at the interview.
I don't know what field you are in, but isn't it still too early to be hearing back about faculty job interviews?
Related: How do U.S. research institutions typically reimburse a faculty candidate's airfare costs for multi-city trips?
@SashoNikolov I'm in math. It's closer to the midway point of jobs season. I think most TT job deadlines have passed, and a substantial portion of jobs with deadlines not more than 6 or 7 weeks ago (some just 2 weeks ago) have already scheduled interviews, a few even having already made offers. Moreover, many smaller teaching focused schools hold preliminary interviews at a big national meeting only a few weeks away and so I'm sure most have made their invitations for those already. Anyways, when it comes to my question, the earlier that I figure out what to do about it, the better.
Wouldn't they just say "you're invited, but we can only pay your fares inside the US." or "we cannot reimburse travel expenses extending 200$" ?
Would the potentially high cost of flying me to an interview lead to some institutions passing me over?
I believe many universities, especially smaller universities, will balk at flying overseas candidates in for interviews. Often they will move down their short lists and only if they are unable to find a suitable candidate that is higher than you on the list, will they be willing to fly you in. This isn't a huge disadvantage, but it is a disadvantage. In my experience candidates often hurt themselves during interviews and rarely perform so well they substantially move up in the rankings.
If so, would it help if I offer in the cover letter to (at least partially) pay my way?
I would not offer to pay for an interview directly. This would in essence be calling out the search committee for being cheap. A better strategy would be to mention in your cover letter that you will happen to be in the States, possibly even states/cities near by, on a couple of dates and you would be happy to extend your trip and come to them for a visit. It would be nice if you have an academic pretence for those visits (conference, seminar, or visiting colleagues), but even saying you will be in the States for personal reasons is fine. If you do not get an interview, you do not have to go to the States.
Thanks for at least confirming that my fear wasn't irrational and also giving me an option that I hadn't thought of.
This is a great analysis and a very creative and useful suggestion!
In practice it's great - ethically I'm not sure your first contact with a potential new employer should be you lying to them.
@LightnessRacesinOrbit One could say something like "I will be in the US from [date 1] through [date 2], in case you would like to invite me for an interview during that time" which could be considered as a conditional statement, although it is not conspicuously so. (Or one could replace "in case" with "if".) Then one can make sure the statement is true without having to make a pointless trip in the case that there is no invitation.
@Trevor: Heh, sneaky.
This surprises me, for long-term faculty positions - because the benefit of getting a better candidate over a 5/10/whatever-year timescale must be so very much greater than the cost of a couple of transatlantic fares. I don't doubt that it's true, though.
I have done lots of international interviews before with skype - it is quite common for university staff. I don't believe cost is a factor or that offering to contribute would help at all. They will set up a skype interview if they are interested in you.
A better suggestion might be to use your research budget to go to some US based conferences and present your work and meet some people. Perhaps stay an extra couple of days at each end. You might also arrange a research visit, where you go to a few relevant institutions to talk about collaborating on some project. That way you have the opportunity to make a good impression with some US based research groups, which is much more likely to land you an interview when they recognise your name among the applicants.
Skype interviews may be common for staff but I think they are very uncommon for tenure track faculty jobs. Faculty interviews take two full days with back to back meetings and an hour long colloquium. The candidate meets with a dozen or more people. Hardly the thing you can do over skype.
@SashoNikolov preliminary skype interviews are common in many fields. I agree though and have never heard of a field that makes TT hires without a campus visit.
We've done Skype interviews for our junior faculty on rare occasions (on one, the candidate was pregnant and couldn't fly). This is at a major R1.
A skype interview can be a prelude to a full on site interview. It's like phone screening on steroids and makes a lot of sense - but it would rarely be sufficient to land a TT job.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.489484 | 2014-12-18T11:32:47 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34464",
"authors": [
"ASHUTOSH_KUMAR",
"Amir",
"BrianH",
"Casteels",
"Dmitry Balabka",
"Floris",
"Flyto",
"Jacob Sánchez",
"Karl",
"Laura Esthela Hernández",
"Lightness Races in Orbit",
"Mr. Ree",
"RoboKaren",
"Sasho Nikolov",
"StrongBad",
"Trevor Wilson",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1173",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12050",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12378",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15062",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6787",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8633",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8937",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94539",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94540",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94541",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94542",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94543",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94610",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94614",
"micha137",
"smci"
],
"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
} |
28617 | Why would a tenure-track job posting ask for an undergraduate transcript?
Recently I came across a job posting for a (mathematics) tenure-track position that asks for both graduate and undergraduate transcripts to be submitted. While this is the first time I've had anyone ask to see my undergraduate transcript for such a position, from a previous question here, it appears to not quite be unheard of.
What I haven't seen addressed is the question of why, generally, would a hiring committee ask for undergraduate transcripts? Are they really going to judge my application based on an errant C in a course unrelated to my field, or do they simply want proof that I have the degree from University X that I claim to have obtained?
The reason for my question is that I am hoping to gain insight into any issues that might appear in my own transcript in order to address them in the cover letter.
I suspect they care more about which courses you took than about what your grades were (assuming they were generally passing)
Some universities reserve the right to retract awarded degrees (for example for academic misconduct discovered after the degree has been awarded).
I had to submit undergraduate and graduate transcripts to several schools each time I applied for jobs in mathematics. I believe the main reason is simply to allow the school to verify that you really have the credentials you claim.
There have been examples where faculty and administrators were caught claiming credentials that they did not possess, so schools are more cautious about such things now. The same is true for background checks - many schools now run a background check before they make an official job offer.
At my institution, when we have a mathematics job search we don't really look at the grades on the transcripts. The cover letter, reference letters, teaching statement, and research statement are scrutinized, but the transcripts just get a cursory glance to make sure the person has the right coursework (e.g. if we want to hire someone in a specific subfield, we might check that they have coursework in that subfield).
Even if you trust faculty credentials (since, for example, a letter from one's Ph.D. advisor is already pretty good verification), there's also the issue of staff. The administration may be more worried about staff candidates lying about their degrees, but believe that it would insult the staff if all their degrees were carefully verified while faculty candidates were simply trusted.
A letter from one's "Ph.D. advisor" can be forged. But so can a transcript.
This does not explain why unofficial transcripts are requested, or why they are requested at the initial screening step.
I think they ask for two main reasons:
Course requirements vary from university to university, and this will give them a good understanding of how well your formal education background aligns with what their own program offers. i.e. did your core requirements match their own? Will you have vastly different expectations of the students in their program from when you went to college?
It will also give them a good idea of what your GPA in your transcript really means. For example, if you took all advanced classes, and even dabbled in some upper-level courses in other subjects which were not required, your GPA may not be as high as someone who took all the easiest courses and very few advanced ones. Also, some people have GPA's which are deceiving, i.e. they took many 'easy' classes in yoga and theater to even out C's in their major. This makes their over-all GPA seem acceptable, but their GPA in their major is low. This could be a red flag, for the hiring team, (not only is the candidate ill suited in this field, they are cunning)! This leads to point #2:
You may be expected to teach some of those courses/subjects you took in undergrad/grad school. They need to know that you have taken similar courses before and that you received acceptable grades in them. Usually a department already has a general idea of what courses they want the person in this position to teach. They need to know if that will be a problem, i.e. if you got a C in every Calculus class you ever took, and they are specifically looking for someone to teach that, you may not fit the bill in that regards. But, if they really like your other skills, they might just end up having you teach a different subject, such as complex analysis, etc. I do not think it would immediately disqualify you as a candidate.
However, I would not be discouraged by a few low marks in your transcripts, if overall you have good ones that outweigh those. Everyone has been through a time in their studies when they had a professor who they just could not learn from, or get a handle on their testing style... or had a semester when something personal interfered with their studies. The most important point is to provide correct transcripts, and please know that the people reading them are human, are educators, and have seen it all already! Personally, I do not think a person's transcripts will be the main factor in the decision making process. But it is additional information that allows the job search committee to understand the candidate's educational background better.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.490002 | 2014-09-17T09:25:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28617",
"authors": [
"Alfpia",
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Gcross Man",
"Sparr",
"Xcali",
"Yu Shen",
"economman",
"emory",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2802",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77913",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77914",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77920",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78003",
"tkaden4"
],
"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
} |
47946 | First Publication as a PhD student
I'm in the process of writing my first paper as a PhD student and was wondering if I could get some general advice regarding the following:
How many Journals to consider submitting a manuscript to and how much impact factor plays a role here. Some say aim high as possible.
How much time should I spend actually writing the paper? Do I continue working on other projects at the same time as writing the paper?
What other considerations should I keep in mind after submitting the manuscript? e.g. should I be writing up another manuscript for another journal-just in case?
I would be very grateful to hear about other people's experiences, etc with their first publication.
Of course,I've read a lot of things on the internet and I've spoken to my supervisors too but I believe you can never learn too much.
My project in the mathematical sciences with applications in biology/medicine.
Thanks.
EDIT: I found the following links very useful: one, two
Have you asked your advisor these questions?
May I suggest this is where your advisor should earn his/her pay? ;-) Previous experience publishing in the same field should prove invaluable. Previous experience should also be important for your point #2. I certainly would continue on other things while waiting, but precisely what is his purview.
@ ALAN WARD & @scaaahu, Thanks for your comments-I've edited my post slightly. I have spoken to my supervisors but I just want to hear from the perspective of a PhD student as well as from other experienced researchers out there.
What do you mean by "how many" journals to consider?
@ Tobias Kildetoft-I meant how many journals would you consider submitting a manuscript to initially? Or do you just pick one and then submit your manuscript?
You are generally not allowed to submit it to more than one journal at a time (though this is field dependent)
@ Tobias Kildetofy-Thanks for that-I'm aware you can only submit to one at a time. I suppose the question I'm asking is how do you decide which one to submit to? How do you narrow things down? Is there a systematic way of searching for journals related to one's topic?
Take a look at this question, for instance: http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/18148/19607
@Kimball, thanks for much for that link-really helpful! I'll also link it with my post.
Dear student, you have your PhD advisor to sort this out. If he/she cannot help, seriously consider changing your advisor.
A Professor here.
In general, yes, aim as high as possible. In practice, I do an educated guess as to which journal to send it to after seeing the final product/paper. If the student is capable and motivated, then I would work with the student to get the paper into the best journal.
As much time as possible. Papers only get better over time. There are always avenues to improve it, technically or presentation wise. This is where your supervisor's experience is critical. Only he/she will be able to push your paper to the required standard and also steer you away from pitfalls.
Many directions here. You could beef up the paper with new results, incorporate more assumptions or proof the general case :) Alternatively, you can work on a new problem or a related problem. Problems tend to reveal themselves as you dig deeper. All my students start on a new/related problem after they submit a paper. They might choose to go on a holiday first though.
All the best ...
Thanks so much for your insight, I've learnt a lot from those few lines.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.490445 | 2015-06-27T07:06:28 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47946",
"authors": [
"ALAN WARD",
"Bong88 corpt",
"Edo Syahputra",
"Higglet",
"John_dydx",
"Kimball",
"Net zero emissions",
"Nobody",
"Philip Noah",
"Pro Essay Writing Service",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"VihangaAW",
"Yu Chen",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132490",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132491",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132492",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132494",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132508",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132516",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132517",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132529",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34766",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51476",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8901",
"xmp125a"
],
"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
} |
163344 | Supply and Demand of Academic Research?
My question needs prefacing. I was thinking about an analogy between research and a macroeconomy.
In the macroeconomy, there's a supply of investment funds from households that ultimately goes toward firms' production of goods and services. Households then consume those goods and services, and judge the value added by those goods and services to their original investment. The cycle repeats. Government acts as a large "resource allocator" by investing some fraction of household investment funds at their own discretion, and the "outside world" likewise contributes to investment funds, consumes, and produces some of the goods and services.
It seems natural to extend this analogy to research funding and "consumption." The private industry produces research "investment" money that is then used by firms and government to fund research. That research is then "judged" for its viability by its spawned correspondence in the short term (forward citations) and the related goods and services ultimately produced in the long run. Some fraction of the value added by that research then goes back into investment funding that repeats the cycle.
An idea follows from this analogy. Just as there's a finite propensity to "consume" and a finite supply of investment funds, there's also a finite amount of productive research that can be performed and a finite supply of research funds. This seems to imply that, though the government can choose to throw more and more investment into any research field, there'll eventually come a point where there aren't enough labs that can draw up useful grants and then reasonably complete them for that investment. Research funding supply "shocks," such as government suddenly quadrupling fundamental research spending in renewables, may have a diminishing return issue.
I understand that there are several conflated classifications here (research vs. R&D) and that many segmentations exist for "research" that may behave differently (laboratories vs firms vs industries). But I'm only interested in the behavior of research grouped as a whole.
So my question is this: are there any analyses of research as a whole that treat it somewhat like a macroeconomy? Is there any value to such an analysis? And if not, why?
"Productive research" is in the eye of the beholder, and is generally not limited per se. A major outcome of research at universities is trained students who go on to do productive work for many entities. I'm not sure your analogy is particularly useful.
You're going to get incredibly biased answers from people on this subforum since their pay check basically revolves around them convincing others what they do has value.
Yes, there are such studies. Here is the result of one. The Economic Laws of Scientific Research by T. Kealey.
His basic thesis is that private firms must find out how to motivate researchers. Only part of this is money. It also includes many things that come under the heading "academic freedom." Freedom to publish, to exchange ideas with colleagues, to be or host a visiting speaker/lecturer, to go to some lab or archive or special site with special resources, etc. etc. etc.
If government takes money through taxes and gives it out, there are many downsides. The persons in government don't usually know what is "good" research. Their motivation is to stay in power rather than doing what is, in any sense, the best thing with the resources. Governing persons do what they calculate will keep them in power. Period. Because anybody who does not do so is soon not in power. Sometimes this results in good things. Usually, mostly always, it results in mediocre things at best, or horrors at worst.
In addition, operating the government funding agencies and tax machinery uses up a non-trivial portion of the total money. And applying for grants uses a non-trivial portion of the university people's time.
Consider a company such as an electronics firm. They want some research done, but don't want to buy a complete specialist lab as they only want it once. So they go to a university that has such a research program. And they must find a way to get those university people to agree to do the research for them. So they drop a stack of cash on the research lab. And another stack of cash on the university. And the only restriction is that the research be held back from publication just enough, and just long enough, so that the electronics firm can commercialize the results.
As to how the lab and the uni spend the money, they literally do not care. The lab can buy new equipment, pay post-doc salaries, buy journal subs, whatever they like. The university can use their cash any way they please. The money can stay in the same department as the research was done. Or go to overhead. Or be used to subsidize some other department that does not have corporate clients. Or be used to fix up the landscaping around campus, or whatever the uni decides.
The important thing is, the uni and the researchers get to decide how to spend the money. The electronics firm gets their research and goes away happy, not placing any restrictions on the money. And once they have commercialized it, the researchers can usually publish the results, possibly withholding certain details such as detailed measurements required for the commercial process. And even those are usually available to researchers on a non-disclosure agreement basis.
The net result Kealey found was this. Private research funding winds up producing roughly 50% more money for the universities. And the restrictions on how they spend it are far less with private money. And research of every kind is funded more. Not just "practical" things like making better electronics. But abstract things such as philosophy, art theory, linguistics, etc.
What does it mean? It means that, by treating research as a human activity that needs to be negotiated for in the same way as any other good, service, or commodity, you wind up with more and better results. And so, university research can get on the slope of The Most Important Graph in the World. The application of freedom to human interaction results in exponential expansion of human knowledge. That in turn results in exponential expansion of every other measure of human well being. A free market for research is objectively a massively preferred choice.
The argument is appealing but incomplete: it assumes there is a lab just “waiting” for the next “Acme Electronics” to give them a contract. It is the role of government agencies (not the government itself) to fund reseach with limited or no commercial benefit so that such a lab has the expertise and tools to fulfill the contract of Acme Electronics. Grants should be handed out $$ on the basis of expert opinion, but reality is often different not because governments are wasteful but because some researchers have (knowingly or not) agendas and so distort the optimal $$ allocation.
So you are under the impression that labs never existed before government agencies started funding them? You're adorable. Also, you think there is some good thing that comes from putting a layer of bureaucracy between the people with official power and the people under that power? You are even more adorable.
Simply pointing out that if you remove government funding there will might not be a lab to help Acme Electronics. We both agree politicians should get out of the way of research once funds have been allocated.
The question is closed, so it's a fairly moot point. However, the entire point of the book I cited was that governments DECREASE the amount of research of all kinds. With private research funding the total funds are about 50% larger than with government, across the board for ALL kinds of research. We do not "both agree" that governments should be involved in any part of the process.
we'll have to agree to disagree then. Best!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.490877 | 2021-03-03T17:16:21 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/163344",
"authors": [
"FourierFlux",
"Jon Custer",
"ZeroTheHero",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110446",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110698",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/90441",
"puppetsock"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
8291 | Whether to use Dr or Prof when addressing oneself in an email?
I feel awkward addressing myself as Dr. X or Prof X. I know that this is common practice (e.g. in emails, letters, etc..). In emails, I prefer to just use my initials or first name. Is this a common experience (i.e. not wanting to be addressed as Dr. or Professor)?
the only people who ever address me as "Dr. X" are undergraduates or spammers.
PhD comics has an analysis of the situation.
Use whatever you feel comfortable with. That said, you should also tailor it to the type of correspondence when necessary. A formal letter should include a formal address for yourself, and less formal can be more or less whatever you'd like. In dealing with students, I generally sign school related emails as "Dr. G.," (with just the first letter of my last name) but I've also taught classes where I've gone by my first name exclusively, and let the students decide how to address me, after telling them it is fine with me if they use my first name. More formal student correspondence (e.g., if I'm cc'ing another instructor, or if the matter involves the administration) gets my full last name, and correspondence to colleagues is almost always my first name.
I also have a signature block, that includes my title, full name, email address and (sometimes) my telephone number.
This answer describes exactly the way I handle this issue.
I've been using my initials as the "sign-off" for my emails as long as I've had my email account. The difference between a formal email and an informal one is whether or not I include the "name block" or if I leave it out, which greeting I use ("Dear Prof. X" or "Dear Y"), and which valediction I use ("Sincerely" versus "Thanks" or "Cheers" or the like).
Normally, I don't know many people who sign their full names to an email. For an official letter, however, your address should be your full name, unless you know the recipient well enough to be on a first name basis with them. (And even then you might still opt for the full name!)
Similarly, I go by my first name, except in formal/legal contexts and when signing correspondence to people who don't know me, and then I use my full name with no honorific (like "Dr." or "Prof."). In particular, I introduce myself to students using my first name. This informality is nearly universal in computer science, and not just in the US.
@JeffE: re universality: except for German speaking space (DE, AT, CH) and Central/Eastern Europe (eastwards from Germany) where the customs are much more formal.
@walkmanyi: No, not really. In the four semesters I've spent at various German and Austrian CS departments, I mostly heard graduate students, administrative staff, and other faculty addressing professors by their first names. (I didn't interact with undergraduates, so there might be a real difference with them.)
There's definitely a difference. I work in an institute with very relaxed standards, compared to the German norm, and undergraduates still call me "Professor."
@JeffE: Well, that's right, in an undergraduate student vs. a professor situation, titles are used, but not among colleagues, most of the time not even between PhD. student and a supervisor. But those same professors would use all their titles as a part of their name in their e-mail address and in their signature blobs, as well as in official non-academic communication (e.g., in correspondence with a city hall, or a tax office). It gets quickly pretty ridiculous especially when the person holds two doctorates, or such. It never goes without a question.
@JeffE: I think what you experienced in Germany/Austria was that PhD students call their supervisor by first name, which is indeed very common. However, notice that the system in the German speaking countries is quite different. A Doktorand-position is considered as your first academic "profession", since you get a reasonable salary and often you do not have to take courses anymore. So your standing is a bit higher compared to the US system.
There seems to be two questions/issues here.
A lot of people I know do not use Dr/Prof/PhD when referring to themselves and in email signatures. I would say that this is quite common and perfectly acceptable.
The final statement you make is "not wanting to be addressed as Dr. or Professor." I think this is quite a bit rarer. I know a lot of people who tell students that they can call them by first name or Dr, or whatever they are comfortable with. I also know people who say "please call me by by first name". I don't know anyone who ever says "please don't call me Dr. or Professor." I would go so far as to say that demanding someone not use an honorific, or being offended when they do, is uncommon and not proper.
This answer is US-centric and based on my own experiences, so take it with a grain of salt.
"Professor" is a job title; "Doctor" is an academic title. Unless you're dealing with your students (in or outside of class), it's usually not necessary to refer yourself or to be referred to as "Prof. Lastname." It's common, at least in the United States, for anyone from grad students on up (and occasionally undergrads) to refer to each other by their first names, even over email.
A signature block is a good way to get around the issue; something like:
Dr. Firstname Lastname
Florple Professor of Theoretical Blorplonomics
Foobarbaz University, Room 12-345, (555)-123-4567
conveys your rank and title without having to worry about whether you should address yourself as Dr. Prof. X, Prof. X, Dr. X, etc. (In most situations, at least in science in the United States, being a professor implies that you have a doctorate, so the "Dr." above isn't necessary. The same line of thought about the email signature applies to doctors outside of academia, though.)
Personally, I generally just use my name, without any titles, except when (a) I'm in a formal or professional setting; (b) most of the people I'm around don't have similar titles; and (c) it matters professionally that I have such titles. Those situations don't occur very often.
I think that it depends on type of email or letter you are writing.
When you are writing an official email, it is better to use your initial as Dr., but when you are writing to a friend I prefer not to use Dr. or Prof.. However, It all depends on the person. Some people prefer to be called Professor Doctor Name Surname even by their close friends and some other are nicer and using their given name is sufficient for them.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.491520 | 2013-02-27T17:17:48 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8291",
"authors": [
"A.Schulz",
"Ben Norris",
"BobDole",
"Davidmh",
"E Ocho",
"JeffE",
"Justin",
"Suresh",
"Yuri Feldman",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1467",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20020",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20021",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20022",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20059",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68113",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68203",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/91901",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/924",
"ig0774",
"jianglai",
"user91901",
"walkmanyi"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
64812 | Is a journal that is on Beall's list but is also in Scopus a predatory journal?
I have seen a journal, in the Computer Science field, that is predatory according to the Beall list (sorry if its not well written), but I see that this journal appears indexed in Scopus and Scimago; so I was wondering how to determine if a journal is predatory or not?
For example, I know that even some journals from Elsevier or Springer charge different prices for publishing an accepted article, and according to some colleagues if a journal charges for publication then it could be a predatory one, but the aforementioned editorials charge also so to whom believe?
I was also wondering if the B list is also accurate, I am starting to have my doubts about it.
There's no one criterion or list that definitely marks a journal as "predatory" or not. You should simply judge for yourself whether the articles it publishes are of good quality and worthy of publication.
if a journal charges for publication then it could be a predatory one your colleagues seem to have a sound approach to scientific publishing.
Indexing in Scopus does not necessarily mean that a journal is not predatory. From the guidelines for being indexed in Scopus:
-The Journal should consist of peer‐reviewed content
-The Journal should be published on a regular basis (have an ISSN number that has been
registered with the International ISSN Centre)
-Content should be relevant and readable for an international audience (at minimum
have references in Roman script and English language abstracts and article titles)
-The Journal should have a publication ethics and publication malpractice statement
These guidelines could potentially be satisfied by a journal that Beall's list considers predatory. Many pay-to-publish journals advertise "peer review", but it may not even be solicited/may not matter in the "decision" to accept the manuscript.
There also can be information on why the specific journal or publisher is considered predatory on https://scholarlyoa.com. I generally have high confidence in Beall's list--predatory journals do not have a great incentive to turn legitimate.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.492000 | 2016-03-09T03:43:09 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/64812",
"authors": [
"Aqib Mujeeb",
"Cape Code",
"GOGO VICTORIA",
"KibalchishTheCoder",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Tim Chaffe",
"Umer Naseem",
"behnaz",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/181801",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/181802",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/181803",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/181807",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/181823",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/181825",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/181898",
"ola"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
85875 | How to know whether a visiting professor will charge the university to present a lecture to academic staff?
In the faculty that I am currently working on we have contacted a Professor who would be giving a workshop in my city. Because of that we have invited him for a meeting for discussing collaboration issues for making research in his area of expertise. Also he would be willing to give a lecture to the lecturers of our faculty about the current trends in his research area.
The question that I have is how to know if this lecturer will charge us for the lecture? It is in the field of Computer Science. If this is the case we need to make the necessary administrative paperwork to cover this expenses (my place of work is very bureaucratic by the way). This lecturer has not mentioned anything about charges so how we ask him nicely if he would charge anything for this meeting and lecture? also what would be the necessary arrangements that we should do in this case?
If there are any expenses then he is the person who responsible for informing you about. Since he did not mention anything about it then it's free. But you can write a direct email asking him if there will be any expenses! Don't be shy :)
The usual way is to state explicitly in your invitation which costs you are going to cover. For example:
Dear Professor X
I would hereby like to formally invite you to give a seminar talk at our university on a topic of your choice. We will of course provide you with a hotel for your stay as well as cover your airfare and all other reasonable travel expenses.
Sincerely, Y
This way, it is clear to everyone what exactly you intend to pay for. If Professor X wants anything else, he will have to ask for it explicitly, and you can then choose whether you think that you want to pay for that as well or not, but at least you put out there what you expect to pay for.
By lecture, do you mean a "talk"? I assume that would last below one hour?
I never have heard of a Professor charging for an invited talk. Especially, if you did not talk about it first. He might need a bus/taxi to get to the university. Therefore you might tell him to keep the tickets, and refund these.
If your university covers this, you might also invite him to lunch / dinner before or after the talk. This would also give further possibility for collaboration.
And if the talk is up to / over two hours, having a bottle of wine or two as a gift that you publicly give him right after the talk, might be appropriate, depending on the size of the audience.
Maybe ask administrative staff whether there is a budget for any of this? At my university we had a budget for all small expenses, where this would have fit in well.
"Bottle of wine" -- not in most public universities in the United States :-)
If it is the US, a good Coors Light might be a nice touch at the half way point. Especially if it is a two hour talk.
@Vladhagen -- well, that's alcohol, too, and the Americans have a rather difficult relationship with alcohol and public institutions. Also: really, Coors Light? Only if you're employed by the Colorado School of Mines :-)
True, Fort Collins is more of a micro brewery town in my opinion.
Usually professors don't charge for lectures to other universities, at least I have not heard of such case. They may charge for lectures to commercial entities, but no, not to universities. The invitation to professor to present lecture at other university is a sign of appreciation/honor.
However, the good speakers are in high demand, so if you are not attractive destination for the speaker to come (e.g. low grade university inviting someone from well established university) the speaker will probably kindly decline due to lack of time. You have to understand - they get a lot of these invitations and will be selective where to go. But I am certain they will not demand payment.
Having said that, the usual arrangement for someone's invited lecture is the offer of covering the cost. Well known, respected and/or older professors may request perks, such as 1.st class airplane tickets (which may be more than you ever expected to pay :). I have heard for case, where professor replied "I will come, but I want 1.st class tickets", and the reply was "We apologize, but this is beyond our budget, so we thank you for your kind offer, but we cannot accept it."
Now, it depends on how eager the person in question is to travel. If you invite someone to EU from US, and offer them 2 days hotel costs + airplane ticket at an attractive location, many professors will grab the opportunity to free visit to Europe.
In some cases, the speakers will cover their costs by themselves, either because they have some kind of grants for exact this purpose (spreading the knowledge, etc), or if they are young, not very recognized in the field, and are eager to get invited talk on their CV.
Sometimes it pays off to invite the professor who is in town for some other event (e.g. conference, business meeting), then perhaps you can get away with only a bottle of wine and/or polite "thank you", but you also risk that he will not be available, since he has other work to do during his stay.
I understand you might be uncomfortable asking, "Will you do it for free?"
But if you can't really afford to pay him, tell him that: "I hope you can visit our institute and give a talk about your work while you're in town. I'm afraid our budget is extremely limited and doesn't extend to paying honoraria. But there's a high level of interest here in (name of field)."
If you can afford to pay, ask him how much you should set aside: "If you can spare the time to come to our institute to give a talk about your work, we would be thrilled to have you for a visit. Would date 1 or date 2 suit? If you are interested, could you give me an idea what an appropriate honorarium would be? This is my first time organizing a workshop of this type."
I don't think you should talk about travel expenses since he's going to be in your town anyway.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.492472 | 2017-03-02T13:35:35 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/85875",
"authors": [
"Krebto",
"Vladhagen",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14518",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42426"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
41531 | Should I resubmit a modified computer science conference paper to a journal?
Here is the situation; I made an article that got published in a Computer Science conference; the final decision was that it was considered a borderline paper. After a while I got an email from the organizers of that conference, letting the authors know that there would be the chance to resubmit our articles to a journal, but that the work should contain at least 30% more contribution than the original paper. Long story short, I worked through all the reviewers comments and added more information on my original article.
Actually I am a little bit afraid if my article would make it through the journal, but because I worked hard on doing the asked changes I would not like to leave it like that.
For that reason, I was wondering that in case of a rejection, Could I submit my expanded work to another conference; or should I just leave it like that? I am afraid that maybe the reviewers from another conference could see it like a case of self-plagiarized, even though I am citing my original article.
What to do in this situation? Should I paraphrase all the article again before submitting it with the new material? or should just let it be?
It sounds like you are asking two distinct questions. 1. Should you submit the updated conference paper for publication? 2. Can you submit the updated manuscript to a second conference?
When in doubt talk to your adviser.
It is common in the Computer Science that the delta between conference and journal papers is 30%. That is not updated text only, but 30% of new substantial material, such as new experiments etc.
When submitting paper to a conference, there isn't a 30% rule. Your new paper needs to have a stand-alone novel contribution.
The reason is that CS adopted an iterative publication style workshop -> conference -> journal. So if your extended paper does not get accepted to a journal, you can attempt another journal, but not another conference.
It should be noted that in practice, the 30% new material often are not new "scientific" contributions, but rather better explanations of what was already presented on the conference. For example, a journal paper might add a more complete list of commands supported by whatever was presented where there was only an excerpt before, or a formal listing of an algorithm whose functional basics were only textually outlined before. At least that's my impression from journal papers I have come across.
@O.R.Mapper ... true, but this approach work may or may not work depending on how strict the reviewers and handling editor of the journal take the XX% rule.
For that reason, I was wondering that in case of a rejection, Could I submit my expanded work to another conference; or should I just leave it like that? I am afraid that maybe the reviewers from another conference could see it like a case of self-plagiarized, even though I am citing my original article.
Submitting a conference paper that is only 30% off of another conference paper is not very likely to succeed. It is likely not going to be considered self-plagiarism (at least not if you didn't copy-and-paste large parts of your old paper, just described similar ideas in a new way), but the reviewers are likely going to criticise that the innovation over existing research (often called the "delta") just isn't large enough.
However, you are free to resubmit to a different journal if this one rejects your paper. Getting "invited to submit an extension" gives you sort of a starting advantage, but you can still submit your revised manuscript to any other journal. Just note that some journals require a larger update than 30%, so you should check that you are in compliance with the journal's rules prior to submission.
Although your paper is now an expanded version, it would most likely have the same or very similar findings as that of the version you presented at the conference. Thus, if you present the expanded version at another conference, you'll most likely be repeating most of the ideas you presented at the previous conference. Thus, your paper will lack novelty, and will not be a success.
In case your paper gets rejected, a far better option would be to submit it to another journal. Make sure you go through the peer review comments even if your paper is rejected, and try to incorporate the changes suggested. That way, your manuscript will be further improved and will stand a better chance of acceptance when you submit it to another journal.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.492969 | 2015-03-12T05:31:21 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41531",
"authors": [
"Jean-Marc",
"Jeromy Anglim",
"Julia",
"Kevin",
"O. R. Mapper",
"OfficerChalk",
"Raj Kumar",
"S. Kari kalan",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112082",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112083",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112084",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112086",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112087",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112092",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"kwame",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
38023 | Would it be ethical for a computer science PhD student to hire an assistant (programmer)?
I was wondering if it would be ethical for a PhD student in the field of Computer Science to hire a programmer in an specific domain; so that he could focus more on the algorithmic or mathematical part of the thesis. Would that be something ethical to do? Should the PhD student include this assistant as a co-author in the articles?
Your second question is answered in When does a paid research assistant become a co-author?
Related: Is it ethically questionable for me (an undergraduate) to hire “research assistants”?
Ethics aside, it is a bit abnormal. Usually in academia this sort of situation is solved via collaboration. I would strongly recommend that you seek out another academic to collaborate with rather than hiring out the work - it'll save you having to spend the money and you get the bonus of a networking opportunity. Double points, in fact, since you will be the originator of the project and bringing this opportunity to others - academia is full of talented people just waiting for someone to throw them a fresh problem.
As a programmer, I feel this is related to https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37370. If you're concerned that your code will be horrible but you'll want to release it anyway, then hiring someone who can make it be non-horrible might be a sensible investment. A matter of how much it's worth to you to have non-horrible code vs code you wrote yourself. Given that the top-rated answer in effect says "your horrible code is fine, there's no major benefit to it being not-horrible", maybe it shouldn't be worth much :-)
I don't think it is inherently unethical to do this. If all relevant parties know about it and you scrupulously acknowledge this other person's work, then I see no specific problem.
Whether it is advisable is a different question...and one you should certainly ask your advisor. I have to say that it does not sound like such a good idea to me. Your thesis work is for you to do...almost by definition. It is perfectly fine to get help from others on your thesis, and some people are better programmers than others (even in CS, I imagine), so getting some pointers from a friend is actually a good idea. But paying someone to do a part of your thesis work just doesn't sound good to me. Either the programming is an important part of your thesis or it isn't. If it is, you should do it yourself. If it isn't, maybe you don't need to do it at all, or don't need to do it to the degree that an outside professional would.
There is also the issue of the impression this subcontracting would make on others. Perhaps the cultural norms in your field are very different from mine (again: ask your advisor), but I would have a rather negative impression of a PhD student who did this: they don't seem to be very committed to their own work.
Added: To be clear, I am interpreting the question as meaning that the doctoral student himself is doing the hiring: i.e., that this is his idea and he is using his own funds. (If his university is giving him funding and simply asking him to pick someone to work with, then even asking the question "Is it ethical?" becomes less plausible.)
In terms of suspecting that this is not a good idea, I hope I was clear that this is my personal opinion, with experience from a field (mathematics) which is rather closely related to CS but is not necessarily identical. As I said, the OP should consult their advisor about this. However, for what it's worth I find it hard to believe that the reaction will be "Sure, spend your money." While not unethical on the OP's part, it seems, shall we say, suboptimal if both advisor and student feel that this is the best way to proceed.
Research assistants are very common. In some things, they are a necessity. And, having suffered horrible research code, I wish more people had hired professional developers to do at least, part of their design.
@Davidmh: If the department or university wants to hire research assistants for a project (presumably one that has scope beyond that of the OP's thesis work, but maybe some PhD students have their very own paid assistants), that would be fine. The OP spending their own money hiring some outsider is a different matter. My main advice was to ask her advisor, but I find it hard to believe that the advisor's response will be "Sure, spend your own money on this project".
@PeteL.Clark I agree doing it out of the OP's own money is a very bad idea. But I wanted to point out that doing all the work oneself is not always possible or necessarily advisable.
@Davidmh I think that one should not do everything oneself is pretty much universally accepted. I think the main question here is whether it is a good idea to outsource part of your (!) PhD work to a contractor.
@AAA, I don't think academia is in the dark about how difficult coding is. Thing is, if something is hard, a professional can charge a lot of money to do it. Grad students, on the other hand, are cheap.
Maybe this should be its own question but: Pete, I'd been thinking that one of my grad students and I might supervise an REU/UROP to automate a bunch of algebraic geometry computations; she is currently doing them by hand. It's nontrivial that these computations are finite at all -- that's her first result. She has also already shown me interesting patterns in the hand computed data, where more data would be helpful. I thought that having supervised an REU rather than done the coding would only look good for her on the job market. Do you think a significant number of schools would disagree?
@David: I don't really have strong feelings about this either way. I suppose that without specific evidence to the contrary, I tend to think that those who supervise REUs are "really behind" what comes of out of the REUs. So if your student supervised an REU and your letter documented her contributions to the project, then it sounds good to me.
Sure, but I doubt you can afford it.
Let's see what the options are:
You can hire an undergrad part-time to write some of your code, but chances are that you'll spend more time digging up their bugs and teaching them it would take to write the code yourself. Probably not worth it.1
Or you could get a real programmer, but a good professional programmer is going to cost much more than a Ph.D. student makes, and probably even more than they cost (In the US the university takes a huge cut for each grad student in a grant, roughly equal to the student's stipend). Probably not worth it unless you are independently rich.
Making matters worse, even a professional software engineer isn't able to read your mind. Their job is to take extremely large systems with many moving parts and make them managable. As a computer science Ph.D. you're probably focusing more heavily on one particular componnet, which you're going to have to understand well enough to write the code yourself.
In either case it doesn't sound like a very good deal for you.
1Note that this only apply if your end goal is simply to avoid coding yourself. On the other hand, advising and supervising are extremely valuable skills and as an academic your job isn't just to do your work but to support the field as a whole. By taking on undergraduates you're potentially doing more for the field than you could ever do by hiring a professional, and future employers will take note. Furthermore, if you treat them as researchers in their own right they might have some valuable insights, but your question was specific to hiring them just to write code.
+1 for mentioning the cost issue. An industry level programmer (even at a beginner stage) makes considerably more money than a PhD student. However, if the programmer is being paid using by the institution or by the adviser's grant, then it might not be such a problem.
As a developer, I can confirm we make more than PHD students.
@AbbasJavanJafari, it is true that a grant could include a programmer's salary. In practice I haven't seen it much, probably because (outside the case of a huge research group) the funding agency is going to wonder why they should pay twice a grad student's salary to improve the efficiency of a grad student by 50%. They'd see more results by hiring two more grad students. Also a lot of the grant is supposedly paying for "education", not professional software.
@Shep, I agree, It is highly unlikely, unless it is a big industry related project and programming plays a major part. Otherwise, it is extremely hard to convince others to pay you to hire additional help when they are paying you to to the job and if you can't do it then maybe they should find someone else entirely.
@itcouldevenbeaboat: As a former PhD student, I can oh-so-painfully confirm we make less than software developers! Woe is us etc...
Some undergrads are better than a lot of real programmers.
I must say it's an honor to be downvoted by @PeterShor. I would agree that I was a bit dismissive of undergraduates, but I've never seen a lot of success when researchers treat them as tools to "just write the code". As researchers in their own right, I would agree with you.
I am going to outline why I think it is ethical and contrast this with the case described in the question Is it ethically questionable for me (an undergraduate) to hire “research assistants”?. Also, I am answering with a perspective from Germany.
tl;dr: Yes, it is ethical and it is routinely done.
The question linked above explicitly asks a similar question from the point of view of an undergrad. At that stage of education, as is also pointed out in RoboKaren's answer there, certain restrictions (might usually) apply (and in many cases, keep applying up to a Master's degree):
It is expected that the student works on their own.
The tasks are reasonably "low-level" in a way that it is realistic and expected that everything is done by one person.
The tasks are likely to aim at demonstrating skills with a lesser emphasis on producing a real product. (That doesn't mean that, e.g., Bachelor theses cannot yield an impressive small software. But in general, what is created is a prototype rather than a marketable full-fledged product.)
Once entering doctoral candidacy, however, some changes occur:
There is not necessarily a requirement that the doctoral candidate does everything on their own. (Please check the rules specific to your university to see whether this applies to you.) The doctoral candidate is supposed to choose the direction and make decisions on higher and lower levels, but that does not mean that they have to write every line of code themselves after the conceptual idea has been documented, or that they have to personally accompany all 50+ participants of a user study.
Related to that, the tasks are sufficiently large that they can be distributed to several people. If the research is funded by a third party, it is often the case that more than one person is funded by that project, so quite some work is done in collaboration.
While the software produced during doctoral candidacy is often still in a very ... say ... unfinished state, it is indeed expected that real research results are being produced. That means (related to the aforementioned user study example) that it is not sufficient that the doctoral candidate demonstrates once that they can conduct a user study by observing five participants, but actual user studies with several dozens of participants, and more than one such study, have to be done. There is no point in "torturing" any single person by having them ask the same questions 50 times, when the same can be achieved by distributing the workload to several persons.
Therefore, as long as the doctoral candidate is "in charge" of the conceptual development of the research and its results, it is completely acceptable to outsource some subtasks. One more point is that the doctoral candidate is supposed to acquire some first practical experience at hiring and leading a team of people.
With that said, I get back to my above statement that it is routinely done, in order to provide some exemplary real-world scenarios. I can think of both paid and unpaid variants of this:
In some places, doctoral candidates can often employ one or more student research assistants (usually Bachelor/Master students), for example, for support in coding. Note that these students are not paid personally by the doctoral candidates, but that their funding is provided by the same sources as the funding of the doctoral candidates themselves. Hence, they are not only allowed, but explicitly meant to work on the same projects as the doctoral candidates. (Still, these student research assistants are "hired" by the doctoral candidate. The doctoral candidate will have the idea that some tasks could be delegated, they devise and publish the job offer, they check applicants in interviews and pick the most suitable one, and they decide about what those student research assistants get to do. The only time the student research assistants normally get in touch with anyone beside the doctoral candidate who hired them is for signing their contract, which happens at some HR department of the university.)
Moreover, when doctoral candidates supervise a Bachelor's or a Master's thesis, they often define the topic and requirements in a way so the results from that thesis provide some input to their own doctoral thesis. Like this, it is also a form of outsourcing some of the work that eventually contributes to the doctoral research.
EDIT: Lastly, I would like to add a more concrete hypothetical example to illustrate what kinds of tasks might be performed by such a "supporting programmer":
Imagine a doctoral candidate who does research in the area of HCI to develop some new GUI elements. The creative research part of the work consists in learning about related work, developing a new concept for a GUI control, and drawing some sketches of it on a sheet of paper, as well as designing/choosing some test tasks to validate the hypotheses underlying the design.
Before this can be converted into a publication, much more work has to be done, though. An interactive prototype has to be programmed, based on the sketched design. It will have to be made to look somewhat fancy (3D/glossy look, animations, etc., whatever fanciness contemporary software GUIs usually feature), as otherwise, study participants tend to be extremely distracted by a directly visible lack of fanciness and unable to see through to the actual novelties of the GUI concept being tested, thus totally distorting results in the qualitative part of any study. Then, to ensure tasks cannot be criticized as unrealistic, some real, or at least real-looking, data has to be integrated into the prototype. That usually means adding code to load (and possibly import/convert) one or more existing datasets. If user behaviour is to be recorded and/or timed, the prototype needs to be prepared for that, as well, by writing certain interactions into a database etc.
The whole last paragraph does not contain a single "scientifically creative" piece of research, this is just straightforward work that has to be done, and it typically takes a few weeks to get right. Toward the end of the paragraph, we're even way out of the actual research domain of HCI and deep in low-level things such as I/O and database access. All of that latter paragraph is perfectly suitable for outsourcing, and a doctoral candidate will not automatically be expected to have done all of this by their own hands.
EDIT2: Another note, as various of the other answers refer to code quality: It is true that in the case of hiring students as described above, the quality of the produced code might be less than what would be provided by a professional programmer (typically not available in the settings I have described in this answer). However
capable students learn quickly (in particular when they are given actual tasks, not practice tasks)
even though the produced software is supposed to be somewhat stable, it will usually still be a "prototype" for a limited amount of uses and thus does not have the same expectations for maintainability or security as production-level code
doctoral candidates are free to choose and reject suitable and unsuitable applicants to their student research assistant job, respectively (and it's totally fine to hire someone for only a month first to check out how they perform)
as university staff, the doctoral candidate also has a partial responsibility to give less skilled students a chance to improve, and thus should expect that not every student supervised or hired is the greatest genius around; this comes back to gathering experience in leading a team, as that will often mean a combination of diverging skill levels during the later work life of the doctoral candidate, as well.
"Note that these students are not paid personally by the doctoral candidates, but that their funding is provided by the same sources as the funding of the doctoral candidates themselves. Hence, they are not only allowed, but explicitly meant to work on the same projects as the doctoral candidates." This is an important point: I took the OP's question to mean that the candidate is paying for the programming out of his own pocket. This does not seem like a good idea to me. If the institution itself is paying for an assistant, that's something else entirely.
The question asked by the undergrad is about hiring an assistant to pursue "outside" research interests, not thesis research or research that is "officially" part of his/her education. So it's very different in that sense.
In fact, I would go so far as saying that "Do not spend your own money on your academic research" is a good general rule of thumb.
@PeteL.Clark: Buying books to form a reference library is a major exception to that.
@aeismail: I agree (more than most: I have lots of books).
@PeteL.Clark: Actually, I don't see any difference between (1) personally paying for that programmer or (2) using a programmer hired by the university concerning the ethics. To me, the difference between these is that (2) happens very commonly, while (1) is hardly ever feasible financially for the doctoral candidate. With (2), it is still entirely the doctoral candidate who posts the job offer, who picks the programmer, and who assigns tasks to the programmer. Your answer sounds more like you generally oppose the concept of outsourcing any work related to the doctoral thesis. I have added ...
... a concrete example of a hypothetical research project where such outsourcing would be appropriate in my opinion (or, particularly, some CS research that crucially relies on some programming, which hence needs to be done, while at the same time obviously not being part of the "creative scientific contribution" that should be the doctoral candidate's own doing).
@ff524: You're right; I may have been distracted by the first paragraph in RoboKaren's answer to that question, which implies thesis research or similar.
@O.R. Mapper: I don't think it makes an ethical difference on the OP's part: as I said, I don't find the practice unethical. However, the more I think about it, the more I worry that it may be, if not unethical, then certainly not a best practice, for the university to cheerfully watch students spend their own money on their thesis research. In particular, in your concrete example the university doesn't sound very supportive of the candidate if they expect this to be paid for out of pocket.
@PeteL.Clark: That is certainly true (and to be clear, I have never encountered a case where a doctoral candidate would have paid such an assistant programmer themselves; at the same time, I have hardly ever met any doctoral candidates over here who did not at one point or another hire a student research assistant via the university). I agree that concerning the payment, the university could be judged ethically differently; the situation for the doctoral candidate and the programmer would be entirely the same, save for minor formal differences (who signs the contract, who transfers the money).
@O.R.Mapper: The ethical issues arise if the research assistant tries to hide the fact that he or she is not doing the work, and passes the "subcontracted" work as his or her own. In principle, paying the student with university funds should make this much harder.
+1. I like this answer for the example GUI research project. As an undergrad doing independent software development, I would get things done a lot faster if I had even one more person working on my current project. Tasks such as database construction/management, REST API construction, client-side GUI design and controller functions for server and client are all my responsibility. In reality, these tasks could be distributed. I'm sure that in many kinds of research, specific aspects of the programming can be assigned to another individual without much need for domain-specific knowledge.
I recommend that you consider your career goals. If you intend to enter a career as a software developer, then I would argue that it may be ethical with credits given but is not a good practice.
I have been a hiring manager and instructor in software development for the last two decades, and one constant that I have encountered is that the more educated software developers are, the worse their code is.
They can solve complex problems in code but their code is generally not maintainable. This is something that I have had zero success correcting. This has become such a problem that resumes for software developers with a PhD or double-masters go to the bottom of the resume stack, under candidates with no degrees.
The Workplace has a question about this that can elaborate on the topic.
I will disagree with the other answers almost completely. If you are in a CS PHD (unless you are in strictly Theoretical Computer Science) and you cannot even code your own algorithms during the PHD, then you are in the wrong business. It is perfectly OK to collaborate (not pay) with other people on writing / sharing the code but putting someone else to code for you (because you cannot do it) is silly to borderline dangerous. You cannot separate the algorithm from the code (unless again you are in strictly Theoretical Computer Science) and how the algorithm performs (on an actual experiment) is in direct correlation with the algorithm's implementation.
How are you going to check if your hired programmer did a correct implementation? You cannot, unless you go exhaustively through his code, which actually might take you longer than implementing your version of the algorithm. But even then, you will never be quite sure. What you are going to do when you think of a new minor optimization? Write him an email, wait for him to implement it and get the answer 2 days later? Good luck finishing your paper in the next 3 years for such a workflow. But even if you manage to finish it, there will always be that 1% chance that something went wrong in his implementation and all your hypotheses will go up in smoke, when someone else implements your algorithm on his own and proves you wrong. What will you do then? Blame it on him? How will you be able to answer the questions about your work that someone else did for you? And say you manage to finish the first paper with the hired help and then he goes to another job. What are you going to do on your next paper? Hire someone else to maintain and expand the previous programmer's code?
Also as a PHD or a postdoc you may be put in charge (as a technical manager) of a research program close to your expertise that might be of significantly larger scale than a research paper. How you will tell your peers or more junior colleagues what to do, if you always rely on someone else to code for you. How can you separate what is doable or not within the project's timeframe if you never implemented not even your algorithms yourself.
When you become more senior (postdoc and beyond) others might actually write more code than you on your co-authored papers. But even then, you must be able to check their code for mistakes, inconsistencies and must be able to predict how the code / algorithm will perform on selected test-cases (unless again you are in strictly Theoretical Computer Science). This is not something you learn by pseudocode, high-level abstraction or shortcuts but it is something you learn by paying your dues by hours of debugging, coding and failed experiments. You cannot get a PHD in Math by letting someone else do the proofs for you. Why you assume CS is any different?
This answer mixes the PhD student's ability to do something up with whether they ethically should/have to this something themselves which are IMHO very different issues. OTOH it is true that outsourcing does not reduce the work to zero for the PhD student, and may result in a net negative gain. (±0)
I wonder where you take the premise "cannot even code your own algorithms" from. By the same logic, you would have to conclude that every software developer who has progressed in their career to become a team leader or something higher is incapable of coding because they outsource a part of their coding tasks to other developers.
@O.R.Mapper. Why not every PHD student hire his own programmer, according to OP's idea? So, in a lab with 5 PHD students, we can have an additional 5 "personal programmers". Of course those programmers should attend meetings with the supervisors since they do all the coding anyway and be co-authors at the related papers at the same time. So that the PHD students can think about algorithms for a month and sit idle for the next six months required for the implementation of the algorithms. Sounds reasonable to you?
@Alexandros: As I have pointed out in my answer, it is absolutely normal in some places that more or less all doctoral candidates hire one or more students for support, e.g. in programming. They do not attend meetings with supervisors because supervisors do not care or talk about programming, hence those meetings are not related to programming. It's the doctoral candidates' task to appropriately instruct those supporting students how to do those low-level tasks, after having discussed the "big picture" on a higher level with their supervisors.
@Alexandros: "So that the PHD students can think about algorithms for a month and sit idle for the next six months" - that's simply not how things work. The hiring and outsourcing is done for the very reason that typically, doctoral candidates do not "sit idle" for even only one month and hence have no time for time-consuming, but ultimately straightforward work such as programming based on a clear specification.
@Alexandros: As a thought experiment, scale things up one or two more levels. Do you see any professors spend months on writing code, hunting down memory leaks and debugging, because otherwise they would be sitting idle for months without anything to do?
If most of the programming work could easily fit in a general library, you can support someone to do an open source library.
It is not an ethical issue to reuse open source software.
But make sure that this piece of software will be well documented and available to help other people that work in your domain.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.493571 | 2015-02-01T22:34:40 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38023",
"authors": [
"Abbas Javan Jafari",
"Alexandros",
"Azrantha",
"Chris Cirefice",
"Code Whisperer",
"CuriousGeorge",
"David E Speyer",
"Davidmh",
"Gregor Lushaj",
"Hunaphu",
"J...",
"Joel Matthew",
"Kieran Mullen",
"Mason Heller",
"Nen",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Peter Shor ",
"Russell Borogove",
"SBL ",
"Shep",
"Simes",
"SolarOne Enterprises Pty Ltd.",
"Steve Jessop",
"Telastyn",
"aeismail",
"bodzio_stawski",
"cbeleites",
"einpoklum",
"ff524",
"fintelia",
"guest",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10042",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103594",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103595",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103596",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103605",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103606",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103628",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103631",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103694",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103695",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103706",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103713",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103831",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103847",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103968",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104025",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/104036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1244",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15360",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17459",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20760",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22916",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23976",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/789",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"mhenrixon",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
68769 | Documentation or evaluation instruments used for accreditation of CS programs under The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)?
I was wondering if there is a repository about the documentation or evaluation instruments that are used for accreditation of CS programs under The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)? I mean it could be real data or examples on how an accreditation process is made. I know that there is some material on the ABET website, but it is very general.
Any help?
In my experience (Aerospace Engineering), the documentation provided to ABET during the accreditation process was stored in large binders, copies of which ended up on bookshelves in various conference rooms around the department. If you are able to visit an accredited department, you might be able to see them in person there. The CS department at my university is/was not ABET accredited, though the ECE department is. I don't know how either of those department treats their accreditation materials, but the ASE department left them lying all over for anyone off the street to see (more or less).
Really??? We kept ours in a locked room. Definitely wouldn't give access to just anyone.
@ff524, it might only have been in the conference room just off the chair's office, in which case, it might as well have been locked. Nevertheless, I saw the binders frequently, and I was not stopped when I opened one and flipped through it (as a student). What's so secret?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.495833 | 2016-05-15T16:44:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/68769",
"authors": [
"Bill Barth",
"Chenhao Wei",
"Rick Bovell",
"Spammer",
"Tammi Jo Cameron",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194096",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194097",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194098",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194163",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194231",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/194238",
"nasim ghavami",
"이총삼"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
41005 | Should a letter of recommendation be customised for each university when applying for a masters program?
I've just graduated in Brazil and I plan to apply in some different Master courses in US. I plan to apply to different universities and I did not want to ask my professors to write many different letters.
Should the letter of recommendation be specific to the university I am applying to or can I use a generic letter for all applications?
possible duplicate of Who should write a recommendation letter?
I am voting to put this on hold as too broad: please revise to ask only one question at a time.
I gave it an edit to focus on the main issue that may make the question unique in relation to other questions on the site. I'd ask the digital question separately.
Never hold your own recommendation letter (looks unethical), let your current lecturers send the recommendation letter to the universities directly (via email for example), that you applied for.
Most universities, ask for two recommendation letters, by asking the information of the lecturers (e.g., email, address, phone, etc.) who do that for you. So the recommendation letters will be sent by your lecturers (e.g., email, mail, online form, etc.) to the universities you applied for; without you seeing/holding the letter.
In many cases, recommendation letters can be submitted by your recommeder using a web site and don't need to be mailed.
But I shoul wait one year after graduation to start applications (for personal issues). So I was thinking of taking the letters with me without the need of asking my professors for a letter one year after finishing the course. Is it really a problem?
@FELIPE_RIBAS Doesn't matter. You ask them then. Holding Your own letters means you told them what to write and you do agree with their opinion about you; and obviously you read it first hand.
I see, even though do not fully agree since they were willing to write their own opinion about me and I would just take them with me. I will talk with them. If for some reason I still take the letter with me, will it be any useful at any place or probably no one will accept?
@FELIPE_RIBAS A letter that does not come directly from your recommender is worthless. You might as well just throw your application fee in the trash. As Brian Borchers points out, most applications are now done online and your recommenders will need to upload the letter to the website directly. You can let them know now that you'll be applying in a year; that they can at least take some notes now or draft the letter. But that's the best you can do.
It general, as the departments you are applying to are similar, your recommendation writers will probably write a template letter that can be quickly modified to a particular university. They should be specific enough for each university, but the overall picture of you will be the same in each.
Usually these days, these letters are done via a secure email or webpage of sorts where they can ask privately questions of your recommenders. (Probable e-signed) In the rare cases, I've heard of doing it through the mail, in which cases, I would help your recommenders with envelopes, with stamps and addresses.
Well, I am a student who also had to get two letters of recommendation from professors when I was in my university (I'm on exchange right now), and I think I have learned the lesson very well: do not write a generic letter and simply ask your professors to sign them. They have more experience than you, and they could even have passed through the same situation that you are experiencing right now. So why would you ask them to shut their mouths while you write all the stuff you want? It does not make sense, because they may know more than you about how the admission process works, and also how some universities like those letters to be written.
Since you still have some time (and planning that now is a good idea), my advice is to ask them to write the letters for you, and then you both sign. It's more natural, honest, and ethical.
But that is what I was going to do but it seems to be a bad idea since I will be seeing the letter (according to the other answers here).
And what is the problem of you seeing the letter? If the professor is willing to recommend you, he or she is probably not saying anything bad about you or compromising your application, right?
That is what I thought so. I was willing to take those letters with me and apply all by myself in the near future using those letters but it's being said that is better that my professor direclty send it to the university I am applying to.
Well, that can be true. It would be better if your professor could submit this letter by him or herself using a website. But, is it feasible? What are the chances of having your letter lost into bureaucracy? "Oh cool one more letter among our 1000 received today..." I would like the folks of the first answer to clarify this problem for us.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.496028 | 2015-03-04T15:18:47 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41005",
"authors": [
"Aaron Williams",
"Ben Webster",
"Brian Borchers",
"Emoun",
"FELIPE_RIBAS",
"Faroq AL-Tam",
"Jeromy Anglim",
"Jo Yousaf",
"Matheus Danella",
"Nishita",
"RandomForestRanger",
"Rick",
"RoboKaren",
"Susan",
"guest",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110534",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110536",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110540",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110541",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110542",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110564",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110655",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110665",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110666",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110667",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110863",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14731",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21552",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/29341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"jakebeal",
"mathcreep",
"mei wumei",
"o-0"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
23855 | Is it possible to work full time in an industry position while on sabbatical?
The standard situation in US research universities is for the university to pay one semester of salary for a year of sabbatical leave, and faculty typically take this sabbatical at another university or research lab, where there is a clear sense of how to fund the sabbatical.
I'm interested to know whether anyone has experience on how to (ethically) fund an industry sabbatical. Specifically:
Is it possible to work full time in an industry position? If so, do you get half-pay? Half-hours?
What (ethical) obligations do you have to ongoing grants (say from the National Science Foundation) during such a sabbatical year?
What (ethical) obligations do you have towards the university that is paying a semester of salary?
Every university has a policy for addressing these matters, and it is best that you obtain the specific policy from your own institution -- a general survey of what goes on at other places will likely not be informative to your present situation. Federal funding sometimes can be used to cover the other part of your salary -- but, again, it depends on the funding source and the rules of your institution.
(-1) Of course every university has its own policies ... but there is a generally accepted standard, and a forteriori so for NSF grants.
@AriTrachtenberg So, if I give you answers that relate specifically to my own university, how will you use that information? Wouldn't it be easier just having this conversation with your own university so you are clear that you are in compliance with policy?
@AriTrachtenberg, if there are generally accepted standards, please provide them as an answer.
@BillBarth Do you have evidence that the standards vary significantly from university to university?
@AriTrachtenberg, no, but you have asserted that there are standards, so I was hoping that you could provide them as an answer. I don't think everyone here even knows what these standards are.
I would have expected Brian P's answer to be as correct as possible under the given information. If the OP believes it is not, he should provide factual information corroborating why he makes this judgement, otherwise the comment (and downvote!) is not helpful. What does the NSF see as standard and what does the OP's university see as standard and what question does this still leave open?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.496480 | 2014-06-23T14:27:01 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23855",
"authors": [
"Ari Trachtenberg",
"Bill Barth",
"Brian P",
"Captain Emacs",
"Dahye Lim",
"Julie",
"RayGe",
"Soham",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17232",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178751",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178771",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63799",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63800",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63801",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63803",
"khk",
"user28183"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
47029 | When should an editor use reviewers recommended by authors of a submitted manuscript?
I am a newly appointed editor to a top journal. I have received my first manuscript assignment. I see in the journal system that the authors have provided preferences for reviewers for their paper.
I was wondering what is the norm like with respect to this. Do editors normally go by author's preference or do they ignore it? What factors should I take into account before considering author preference of reviewers?
On one hand this makes my task of searching appropriate reviewers easy but I suspect this might also give an unfair edge to the authors if the reviewers have some/any kind of bias.
As an editor you have a decision to make: is paper good or not. You may enlist help of whomever you want to that end. If you can get the kind of help you need from the people in the "suggested" list, by all means use them.
@BorisBukh Right, but since this is my first time, I wouldn't know ahead of time how helpful the author's preferred reviewers would be.
The way the preferred reviewers are used varies. Some go by these suggestions whole-heartedly while others do not. I lean towards the latter since my experience with some preferred names is less than favourable.
In my experience names listed can be good. I usually double check to see if persons seem affiliated in some way and if they do I avoid appointing them. As a rule, however, I try to find persons independently and based on my own experience. I tend to use the preferred names as back-ups unless my preference and the authors coincide.
The reason for my slight aversion towards the preferred is that some authors tend to list friends and other persons who are obviously close to the authors. I have seen many low quality reviews come out from such reviewers an clearly at a rate very different from independently chosen reviewers. Judging what is too close is not easy and sometimes it may be justified if, for example, the topic is such that local knowledge comes into play. For the reason of uncertainty I therefore try to at least mix them up so that one is chosen by me independently and the other is selected from the authors suggestions.
So, try to assess the quality of the preferred reviewers and at least try to find some to complement a preferred reviewer will be my advice.
It is also common that authors list non-preferred reviewers. I always stay clear of such reviewers since I do not know what lies beneath the sentiment.
I understand where you're coming from and I also would be leery of accepting the author's suggestions. However, as an author, I have often racked my brains to find suitable reviewers whom I don't know and who would be impartial. It's often a bit of a pita to do so. If the journal is just going to ignore my suggestions, wouldn't it be simpler all around if we were not asked to go to the trouble of suggesting them?
@terdon There's no problem with suggesting reviewers you know. Just make sure there's no conflict of interest such as joint projects, publications, or affiliations.
@silvado I don't mean "know" as in I see them in a conference every couple of years and say hi. I mean that I try to avoid friends and colleagues. People who might view the article favorably because it is mine. I have often worked in tiny fields where that is virtually impossible since we all know each other. My ethics make me avoid suggesting anyone who might be predisposed to give me special treatment. My point is that if the journals, understandably, avoid using my suggestions, it would make my life easier if they'd also stop asking for them.
So it seems the way to avoid reviewers in many cases is to list them?
I assume you're one new member of an established editorial board, with an Editor in Chief and other members of the board fully involved. Why not ask them what the convention is for this particular journal?
Yes, as a new editor you should really talk with the editor in chief and other editors. If you have any uncertainty regarding duties or procedures, it's always better to ask than to find out afterwards that they think you handled something poorly.
Indeed. They assigned you because they value your knowledge in the area. But they will understand that as a junior colleague, you may lack experience, and will understand that you may need some mentoring.
@AnonymousMathematician I think since the journal allows authors to list their preferred reviewers, it should be within the rules to select one. I am wondering about whether this is the case in reality? I will certainly contact the editor-in-chief but thought I would get much broader views on the topic here.
@Ketan: There's certainly no harm in asking here too. It's worth keeping in mind that journal web sites can offer weird options. For example, some publishers use editorial management software that may offer authors options that just don't make sense for their field/journal.
@Ketan: And for the benefit of the rest of the academia.SE community, can you please post any helpful advice you get from your editor-in-chief as an answer to this question!
Be extra careful when following authors' suggestions for suitable peer reviewers. There has been a recent case of authors suggesting fabricated contacts as "reviewers", as described on http://publicationethics.org/news/cope-statement-inappropriate-manipulation-peer-review-processes. That case led some publishers to stop asking for reviewer suggestions explicitly within their submission processes.
Measures of caution that I find useful include:
Only choose an author-suggested reviewer if you can verify independently that this person is suited as reviewer, ideally from your own prior knowledge.
Don't use the contact address provided by the authors, but use a contact address that you can obtain independently, for example from the reviewer's university web page.
Verify very carefully that there's no conflict of interests for that reviewer, for example joint publications, same affiliations also in the recent past, or similar.
Don't make a decision if you only have reviews from author-suggested reviewers, but have at least one independently chosen reviewer.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.496729 | 2015-06-11T15:41:47 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47029",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Ben",
"Boris Bukh",
"GodotMisogi",
"If you do not know- just GIS",
"Ketan",
"Kim Barke",
"Menachem Elgarten",
"So Sánh Giá Khóa Học",
"Thuan Do",
"Tian Du",
"Walterius",
"Willi",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11523",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129639",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129640",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129641",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129644",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129674",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129679",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129777",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17209",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3890",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/609",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6103",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026",
"silvado",
"terdon"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
26916 | Whether to use the author name with numeric references when describing a particular study
I am a little bit confused regarding the best way to attribute a research paper in my thesis.
Example:
" The work in [1] proposed a new method for ..."
" John et al.[1] proposed a new method for ..."
Also, when I have the following context:
" our method results outperforms the results in [1] ... "
" our method results outperforms the results provided by John et al.
[1]"
Sometimes, due to space limitation, I can not mention the names of the authors every time which pushes me to use the paper only (like examples 1 and 3). Also, I think it is unnecessary redundancy to mention the authors every time.
My question is, is that OK? should I mention the authors of the work every time?
Are examples 1 and 3 accepted or weak?
To me all these examples look OK with the only remark that in Example 3 I'd say "results of [1]" rather than "results in [1]" but it's just grammar anyway.
I have seen both used widely. Personally, I find the second and fourth styles make for more coherent reading, since I don't have to constantly flip to the references to look up numbers.
There may be slight differences between fields (I am in the chem-phys-mat. sci triangle), but the short answer is no, you do not need to explicitly name the authors.
Stylistically, the "the work in [1] proposed" sounds rather forced and exactly as long as "Smith et al.[1] proposed". Note I am not a native speaker, so I have no clue what I am talking about. On the other hand I would definitely would leave the name out if I am talking about the same work over and over. Also, if you structure your statements like "This problem has been approached using this [1] and this methods [2]", giving the name is actually more awkward than leaving out.
I think it also improves readability. Compare "our method outperforms the name-of-the-method method [1]" with your examples (name-of-the-method: you explicitly name what is the main difference). Assuming that the reader do not know the reference list by heart, this kind of reference is more explicit and more informative than the other two.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.497213 | 2014-08-07T18:49:52 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26916",
"authors": [
"Arcscofield",
"Shannon Moon Shan",
"Tim",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10483",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12703",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72298",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72299",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72313",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72354",
"just-learning",
"mostafa",
"quettabit",
"skalarproduktraum"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87965 | Where should I host a (simple) personal academic webpage?
I've finally decided to stop putting off creating an academic webpage for myself... both for the purposes of a job search and more generally to communicate what I'm about research-wise. But - where shall I put it?
The options seem to be:
My institution's personal webpages facility
My own web server at home
Some for-pay general-purpose webpage/website hosting service
Some gratis general-purpose webpage/website hosting service
Using one of the specialty academic-webpage platforms (which apparently exist)
What are noteworthy pros and cons of these options, in your view, that are worth considering (and might not be immediately obvious)?
Notes:
I'm a post-doc with a contract ending in several months, which may affect the choices, but feel free to answer this question for other stages in one's academic career as well.
I'm not interested in "Why I think provider XYZ is best"-type answers, although if you describe your experience and what you opted for, and provide a link, I think that would probably be legit.
The page is not intended to store any content such as copies of my papers, zipped source code etc - but it will have links to those. We're talking about a vanilla "about me and what I do and some links" kind of a thing.
Relevant question covering one aspect of my concerns: Institution domain or domain of my own for two of the possible options. Related but not-so-relevant question: Self-hosting vs Wordpress hosting for your collection of articles and blog.
This has mostly been asked before. (1) institution versus own domain;(2) wordpress/blogger etc versus own domain
@JeromyAnglim: Both question seem to focus on which domain to host under; that's a consideration, but only one of them. The second question also relates to a blog and collection of articles, which my question doesn't.
No worries. Perhaps it makes sense to link to the related questions in your question to make clear how yours is different.
Note that you don't have to choose only one of them. For instance, I use a static website generator (like Jekyll/Hugo that have already been mentioned) and then rsync the output to both my university's server and a free hosting provider.
If all you want is a single static page, you can host a site on AWS S3 for a few cents a month, assuming you're not getting millions of page hits. Google cloud compute has similar capabilities. Just a cost consideration when comparing "real" web hosts (ones that provide server side scripting like wordpress). This doesn't take into account the cost of a domain name, or AWS IAM.
@tolos: That's interesting when comparing costs; however, I assume they offer nothing except for access to files, right?
Right, S3 is a place to store files that are accessible from the internet. It's part of Amazon Web Services (AWS) which covers a range of cloud products. Google compute and Microsoft Azure have similar offerings (hosting basic static content as one small piece of a much larger product). These are some of the biggest cloud providers ATM, though I'm sure you could find a similar product elsewhere.
After your contract ends, will you be starting another position at a different institution? If so, the simplest approach IMO would be to set up the web page on your current institution's server. When you switch jobs in a few months, move the page to the new institution's server, and replace the page on the old server with a simple HTML page redirecting any visitors to the new page. Repeat this any time you switch positions in the future or until you decide to take the plunge and get your own private domain (I don't have one myself and don't really see the point for most people in academia).
If you're getting a service without paying for it, you're the product, not the customer.
@DanRomik - Much better to make a page elsewhere that will be there forever, and then link to it from each institution. It would be different for someone in a long-term position.
@aparente001 that's a very debatable claim. Using an external web host will either require paying a recurring monthly payment and maintaining yet another internet account that you have to update whenever your personal details or credit card number change, or alternatively using a free service that will subject you to annoying ads and/or the indignity of an uncool web address (like sites.google.com/my-name etc). Each of these approaches would be considered "better" by a different group of people. My comment describes my own preference and what has worked for me personally.
@DanRomik - Your solution sounds great for someone with a stable, long-term position. For the opposite situation, I'll respond to your specific concerns: credit card info changes -- yes, this will happen once every few years, but you will get several email reminders to update your credit card info; sorry, which personal details might change other than credit card info?; annoying ads: I don't believe wordpress.com has annoying ads, does it?; uncool web address: easily solved with wordpress.com for about $10/year for the domain name, I believe. (Agreed, stay away from google sites.)
@aparente001 as I was saying, this was the approach I've used since I was a graduate student (and later through a succession of unstable, non-long-term positions and then to my current position) and I found it to be the best one for me. There is clearly no objective sense in which one approach is better than another, it's simply a matter of taste and personal preference. Perhaps it's also worth mentioning that the approach I'm suggesting is the one taken by the vast majority of people in my field (and AFAIK also in computer science which is OP's field).
@DanRomik - Glad it worked well for you. Somehow I don't think someone would be asking if your approach came naturally to him or her.
Check out https://about.me/
@VerenaHaunschmid: I did, and didn't like it :-(
This doesn't sound like your website will have special requirements that an all-purpose CMS couldn't handle. My advice is to go for one of those "all included" packages by a mainstream provider with something like Wordpress, and find a nice-looking template. This is the easiest choice, it will guarantee up-time, and you don't have to spend valuable time to administrate or design the site. It is also not very expensive: Perhaps around 5-10 USD/month, plus a one-time expense for the template (5 USD and up). Two alternatives might be attractive as well:
Nerdy option: If you are familiar with GitHub, you can use GitHub pages to self-host a static website with Hugo or Quarto, which is nice if you work a lot with (R) markdown. Once it's set up, it's a breeze to update. Here's an example.
Thrifty option: Use google sites.
Details:
My institution's personal webpages facility
Pro: Demonstrates academic credentials and shows your affiliation. Con: Not much leeway. Will you be able to use it after you leave the institution?
My own web server at home
Pro: All the control you need. Con: Way too much overhead; perhaps you can't implement what you need after all.
Some for-pay general-purpose webpage/website hosting service
Good balance between control and ease of use.
Some gratis general-purpose webpage/website hosting service
Free comes at a price. Perhaps you'll have up-time issues, ads or no own domain, certainly less control.
Using one of the specialty academic-webpage platforms (which apparently exist)
See here.
I agree with these points. Institution's sites are ok, but you may very well loose it after you leave, and as @henning says, you loose control (I've seen many prof/lab websites held outside the institution probably for this reason).
For what it's worth, I use Wordpress.com - which is free. It is easy to use, minimal effort, lots of nice layouts to choose from, and allows you to produce a diverse site (mine is a hybrid between science and science communication). There is nothing stopping you from linking other sites like GitHub or ResearchGate from your website either.
Extremely nerdy option: Set up your website on a general-purpose cloud provider like AWS or GCP. Pro: Ultimate flexibility, can run any application under the sun including things unrelated to your website. Con: Probably massive overkill for OP's use case.
@Kevin: It's not very nerdy if you depend on Amazon or Google...
GitHub option certainly looks interesting. Thank you!
@einpoklum: Perhaps not, if you're thinking of running your own server. But it is a lot more reliable than running your own server (Do you have redundant power? Dedicated cooling? Automated hardware failover?).
@einpoklum it's nerdy in the sense that it's a system that assumes you know everything you need to know to get a server up and running, including the command line, and the ins and outs of a Platform-As-A-Service's tiers, pricing model, and product naming.
For a personal website and occasional other applications, a (reserved, it's cheaper) AWS instance really isn't that much maintenance (provided you have the knowledge to do basic sysadmin stuff, which I suppose isn't a given). I do it myself.
Good to know. As long as the courts haven't clarified what this means, it could or couldn't include a personal website at a big hosting service. (My hunch is that Springer doesn't want you to upload your papers to academia.edu or sci-hub, they don't care where your personal website is hosted.)
My current setup is that I have a personal domain which redirects to my institutional website. I recommend this, as it gives you the best of both worlds -- you get the officialness of an institutional website, but also the flexibility of owning your own domain, and it's cheap.
Getting a domain only costs US$1/month and is very easy. (I use Google domains.) If I need to move my website to a different instutition or decide to use something like wordpress, I can simply change the redirect from my domain.
A personal domain also gives you an email address associated with it. You can port this between institutions and it looks more professional than putting @gmail.com on your papers.
Since I first wrote this answer, I have moved institutions and moved my website hosting to Amazon web services. This is a cheap option (~US$0.60/month), but was a pain to set up.
I think GitHub Pages would be a really good solution for you.
Note:
GitHub Pages source repositories have a recommended limit of 1GB
Their URL would be username.github.io
You can enable HTTPS support
This is something that github pages are generally used for
While you may very well be right, that is not an answer to my question.
@einpoklum - Actually, this is a fine solution. Github Pages allows you to essentially host your own static site by just using a github git repo. You may notice that the top answer already lists github pages, in fact.
@eykanal: It is indeed a fine solution, but that's not what I asked.
@einpoklum - I disagree, this falls very neatly under (4) in your original list ("Some gratis general-purpose webpage/website hosting service").
@eykanal: It does, but I wasn't asking for examples of these. Please read the question again.
@einpoklum You are correct, I presented what I though was the best solution to your problem when you asked for pros and cons to each of your available options. Mistake acknowledged. However, I stand by my suggestion.
Sad day, I can't upvote @henning 's answer.
@cOborski: ... which is why I couldn't bring myself to downvote. I'm going to use it (although perhaps combine it with links/copies in other locations).
So, I'm reluctantly +1'ing you because I created a GitHub page eventually.
Some existing free software, such as, for example, wordpress.com (which I believe is ad-free) would fit your current needs, and you could upgrade to wordpress.org later if desired.
Advantages:
security
eminently google-able
for $10-20/year, you can use a custom domain name (if you are concerned that a free domain name might look embarrassing)
stays the same when you change jobs
You could link, point or redirect from the university canned page to your own site, and then in the next job just do it again.
The most elegant solution would be Federico Poloni's: "I use a static website generator (like Jekyll/Hugo that have already been mentioned) and then rsync the output to both my university's server and a free hosting provider." However, if you don't want to bother setting this up, a simple link works too.
Can you elaborate on (1) How this option is more secure than other options (2) Why security is an issue for this kind of content (do you think defacement is an important concern?) (3) Why the custom domain name is more relevant to this option than other ones?
@einpoklum - Security is built into software like wordpress. // Sites get hacked and next thing you know, your site is advertising Viagra. // Some participants on this page have talked about a canned domain name not looking professional, so I wanted to provide reassurance that a custom domain name is compatible with wordpress.com (and is low cost).
Umm... you were saying? And that's just this year's latest hack. Using a prime target like wordpress increases your chances of being hacked significantly compared to many of the other options. As for the domain name issue, perhaps you should clarify in the body of your answer.
@einpoklum - I'll tell you frankly that I'm getting an uncomfortable nya-nya vibe from your most recent comment. Not quite enough to flag, but I wanted to let you know I would prefer a more respectful disagreement. // I took a look at the article you linked to. At the end, it says, "the fix has automatically been deployed on millions of WordPress installations in the few hours after the patch was issued." // Edited post, thanks.
Well, you did write an answer which doesn't address the question directly - recommending one out of several hosting service providers - and with flimsy basis. I thought maybe I was missing something, but your comment doubled-down and made it, well, preposterous. Sorry.
It's hardly preposterous, @einpoklum. Yes, DIY makes you a lower-value target, but you're also far less likely to notice a large proportion of security breaches. A major hosting provider has teams dedicated to security; if your DIY gets hacked, you're spending six hours fixing it when you could be writing that paper.
@ArtOfCode: It's preposterous to claim that WordPress is a good option because of security when they occasionally get hacked. It is empirically insecure. And that's doubly the case when we're talking about a simple static website with some personal info, for which security is almost a non-issue.
No, it's not "preposterous", @einpoklum. It may not be the ideal solution for you, but there are several million people who use it for their personal websites for whom it's a good solution. Not liking a suggestion does not make it preposterous.
@ArtOfCode: WordPress is a very nice platform, what's preposterous is to give a non-answer to my question which extols WordPress on a point which is one of its weaknesses.
@einpoklum - How would html written by a random (non-web-developer) academic compare, in terms of vulnerability, against wordpress.com or wordpress.org? // But please note, I only mentioned wordpress as an example of some canned solution that can stay put when you change insitutions.
@aparente001: (1) If you meant to argue that canned solutions are better than the other options, please edit your answer to say that explicitly; that's not what it says now. (2) "How would... compare?" Very favorably: A non-web-developer would not write any scripting code, and would not dynamically access external resources, and thus would not create any security vulnerabilities. Of course, running your own web server is a different story; but it would still compare favorably to WP. WP gets hacked; your own web server may or may not get hacked.
@einpoklum - Could you clarify, when you say WP, do you mean .com or .org or both equally? // Have edited the answer; hope this is clearer than before.
@aparente001: It's WP.com that gets hacked, with vulnerabilities in the WP.org software (mostly, I suppose). So I meant WP.com .
@einpoklum - Well, you could go straight to wordpress.org software from the start, if you like. By the way I read your profile, thanks for posting the info; thought you might like to know about "comuting" which I guess means "computing" and also a dead link at the end.
I'll strongly defend this choice (emphasis mine):
Some for-pay general-purpose webpage/website hosting service
But I'll tangent a little from the question itself, because I have answered questions by OP on unix.SE . Yes, this is using information from outside of the question, apologies, but this still may be interesting for people with a similar background.
If you are capable of setting up that option it has huge advantages if your research (or simply interests) involve a lot of computing. (And OP is a computer scientist).
The Bad side
There are plethora of platforms to build a blog, and the maintenance of such things is not as bad as it was in the '90s and early '00s. Most platforms invested heavily in resilience, at the cost of some more work in the initial setup. I'll argue that most of the overhead in having your own VPS running your website is during the setup. If you do not tinker with it, it keeps working. You may just need to clean up the logs at some point.
For an example, I just checked on a toy data warehouse I've created for a presentation 9 month ago (and forgot to shutdown). It turns out I could do the same talk today because it simply works.
There is nothing wrong with joining this with:
Using one of the specialty academic-webpage platforms (which apparently exist)
You can just run it on a subspace (subdomain perhaps) of the website. That would actually be a pretty good choice.
The Good side
But wait, we are talking about a personal website, a blog like thing, so why a data warehouse? That is the first advantage. For a talk I needed an example system so I just dumped it on my VPS and made it available through a subdomain. There was no need to talk to the IT team of the building where I was doing the talk to allow access to some server, I just needed an internet connection. Several other things I dumped next to my personal website over the years, some random examples:
Material for people that I've trained whilst overseas, much easier to share than asking everyone to bring a pendrive.
Example programs for my presentations.
My PGP key.
Maps of how to reach a venue.
A board to visualize combat in role-playing games on a tablet.
Crawlers that needed to run whilst the machine I was using at my institution was due for maintenance.
And my favourite:
All slides that I use for talks.
I really, really, really love that last one. LaTeX Beamer produces slides that can be viewed directly by any modern browser (i.e. PDF, and Power Point has an export option too). Therefore when I go somewhere to give a talk I do not worry that my pendrive will not be read by the computer at the venue, I do not worry that the format of the slides will not be understood by the software on that computer. I only ask the organizer if the machine will have an internet connection and a browser (and I take the pendrive with the slides just in case).
In summary, you can share content with people (or with yourself when you're using an alien machine) by typing its name (URL). This allows you to overcome several problems with technology.
The Ugly side
It costs money, yet not that much. A domain registration costs some 10-20 USD per year, and several registars (providers of DNS resolution) will have reduced prices if you buy several years. A VPS (virtual private server, which is cheap because you share hardware (but not IP)) for a personal website plus the perks I gave above, can be of the lowest tiers offered. Providers that sell a VPS at 10-20 USD per month are often decent (free VPS' will involve considerable downtime so it is normally a bad idea for a website).
It requires some work, and some learning (but doesn't everything require it? We all learn all out lives). Therefore it is not recommended for not computer science people. Note that not recommended does not forbids you from doing it, I know a very good linguist Lecturer who loves to tinker with technology and therefore his website.
You may also get absorbed into the website and tinkering with it to a point where you neglect other things. But again, that is something that may happen in any of the forms of building the website that you propose.
P.S. It was my intention to omit provider names that I use, since OP states that discussing best providers is off-topic. And, it does not matter that much since a there are several good ones out there.
One can put one's slides on dropbox, box, google drive, etc. for ease in presenting, or on one's personal website -- is a VPS really necessary?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.497523 | 2017-04-12T10:11:13 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/87965",
"authors": [
"ArtOfCode",
"BurnsBA",
"Dan Romik",
"Federico Poloni",
"Gallifreyan",
"Jeromy Anglim",
"Kevin",
"Scott Seidman",
"Shawn",
"Verena Praher",
"aparente001",
"cOborski",
"einpoklum",
"eykanal",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20457",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20504",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/60780",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64844",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70557",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9692",
"tea4two"
],
"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
} |
2387 | BSc in CPSC or CIS: How will this affect Grad School applications (Stanford, UBC)?
I am trying to decide whether or not I should pursue an undergrad in Computer Science (link to curriculum)
or an undergrad in Computer Information Systems (link to curriculum).
Specifically, I'd be curious to know if picking one over the other could be problematic later, when applying to a masters program in computer science (the CIS degree is much less theory heavy). I am interested in Standford's MS program, but if I go with the CIS program, I am concerned I will be filtered out in the selection process because I don't hold a brick-and-mortar CS degree with a heavy theoretical focus.
As a mature adult, I have financial obligations that constrain my ability take on studies full time, so I am leaning towards the CIS degree because it is offered through distance education (the CPSC degree is not), and subsequently applying to Stanford's Masters program which is also offered through distance education.
FWIW, I currently work as a developer full-time, and in my younger years I worked on a lot of random jobs, mostly non-applicable to my computer science interests.
The obvious answer here is: if you have very specific programs in mind, and a specific set of constraints that may hinder you, check with the upper-level programs you're interested and find out what their requirements are. If the master's program requires a bachelor's in computer science, then you have your answer. If not, then they may list what degrees they accept as "equivalent" or "sufficient" for their program.
But, in general, when in doubt, ask. That's what graduate officers and admissions staff are there for!
+1 for "ask". Just call some of the masters programs you intend to apply to and ask them for their opinion; they'd be more than happy to help you out, and their feedback is definitely more useful than anything you'll find here.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.499059 | 2012-07-10T19:32:17 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2387",
"authors": [
"Andy",
"Ankita",
"Ankur Chauhan",
"Arkan",
"James",
"The Man",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10953",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10977",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10978",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12022",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5959",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5960",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"user2501704",
"user9794"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
2433 | Where to publish Ph.D. related articles in the IT field
I am currently working on my Ph.D. with topic “Research of the current methods and technologies for web sites and web application development“. I have some articles that I would like to share(and also I must have several publication before I complete the course) so I was wondering can someone advice me to and university/science organisations that publish students articles.
Thanks in advance
This is a question for your advisor.
Googling for "call for paper" "web application development" suggested following links which could be useful.
ConFoo Conference
IJCA
Actapress
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.499510 | 2012-07-13T20:47:26 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2433",
"authors": [
"Andrea",
"Benedict Eastaugh",
"Joey Eremondi",
"Kevin Ford The Submariner",
"Nate Eldredge",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6067",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6068",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6069",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6090",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9583",
"user13107",
"wonglkd"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
3205 | What are the pros and cons in sending a research paper to well-known author, before publishing?
Currently I am reading a research paper of a well-known author published in 2011. I did a slight modification in his method and the new method is very efficient.
Is it reasonable to send that paper first to the author before sending it to any journal?
Do you mean: sending a draft or sending a published (or: submitted, posted on arXiv) paper?
I've worked on a few method development projects and I'm of the opinion that it is a good idea particularly if the author is well-known and well-liked (if they are a dick or you don't like them, that's a different story).
The obvious reason why is because when they happened to see your paper going out for review which claims a "massive improvement" over previous methods, they aren't going to get upset at you and pull strings to make your life miserable. Furthermore, they might have insight whether or not the new method is useful or merely enhancing a particular error which makes it look good.
The only instance where sharing the paper might be a bad idea is if they happened to be working on a similar improvement. Receiving the paper may motivate them to scoop you.
Thank you very much. Author is still working in that area. I am just worried he may take my idea and publish in another form saying that my work is not that much appropriate.
@srijan Some areas have preprint archives (math, physics, and theoretical CS use arXiv.org). These are public websites, where you can submit your paper before you submit it to a journal. Anyone who wants can download and read your paper. When you submit your paper here, it gets a time stamp, which can help with priority disputes.
@ Dear sir, my area is mathematics. Can you please tell me how can these websites help?
arXiv.org also accepts publications in mathematics. Check it out!
Oh, if you're in math, you're fine since arXiv is very forgiving. If you're in stem cells, or miRNAs, that's a different story. Actually in those cases you should never send anything to anyone. Even your significant other.
@bobthejoe I have got few papers related to my field. I want to know what they actually do? What about copyright? Do they improve your paper and send us back? How much time it takes for review? Sorry for this much question. Thanks a lot
@srijan: Maybe this should be a new question, but just look at the site. You send them a preprint and they post it; that's all. There is a short verification process to check that you are actually a mathematician and not a crackpot; otherwise there is no review at all.
Receiving the paper may motivate them to scoop you. — Or it may motivate them to make you a coauthor! (See "well-known and well-liked".)
I think JeffE's comment essentially summarizes the dilemma. If the person is a helpful person, they are going to be a helpful person. If the person scoops people, chances are you'll be scooped. Asking the senior professors for their assessment is probably the way to go.
@bobthejoe Problem with me is that I don't know him personally. Neither my guide know him. Thanks for replying.
@JeffE I don't know him personally. In that case what would be the best option?
@srijan: Ask someone who knows him personally. If that's not possible, ask someone who knows someone who knows him personally. But even if you can't get a sense of their personality, you can protect against scooping by first posting your paper to the ArXiv and then drawing attention to your ArXiv preprint.
@JeffE k sir , i contacted with him and i get a positive response. Still do i need to go fro pre print from arxiv..?
I think that the preprint (depending on your field, math sounds like one of them) is just good practice. Sounds like you're in a great situation. The only question left is whether he gets a name on the paper or an acknowledgement.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.499629 | 2012-09-15T04:12:12 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3205",
"authors": [
"Dan C",
"JeffE",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Nilay Kumar",
"OferBr",
"Piotr Migdal",
"Skylar Sommers",
"Srijan",
"TransferOrbit",
"Vincent Garton",
"bobthejoe",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1069",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1282",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8193",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8194",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8195",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8200",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/897",
"kena"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
163505 | In ACM in-text citations, should the first citation to a given source include anything except a number enclosed in brackets?
For example, suppose I am citing Dr. John Doe's Pie Are Round, Pi Are Not Square: Digitally Representing Double Entendres from Natural Languages for the first time in my paper. Which of the following would be acceptable?
A particularly useful algorithm for ranking the corniness of natural-language jokes may be found in [3], where...
Doe [3] presents a particularly useful algorithm for ranking the corniness of natural-language jokes, where...
In his groundbreaking Pie Are Round, Pi Are Not Square: Digitally Representing Double Entendres from Natural Languages, Doe [3] presents a particularly useful algorithm for ranking the corniness of natural-language jokes, where...
Thank you...
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.499953 | 2021-03-07T21:46:32 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/163505",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
23961 | How to make a paper anonymous for reviewers when it heavily extends on your own previous work?
I am writing a paper that continues and extends my previous paper (the usual situation), and I plan to submit it to a journal that conducts a double-blind review. It is a research that started recently, so I have only one paper published.
The published paper represents a strong foundation of the research, which means that I would have to refer to it in the new paper at least a few times (basically the new paper extends it). While the peer-review is double-blind, the reviewers would then easily realize who is the author.
Therefore, I can't just cite it as it's someone else's research because it's obvious that I am talking about a paper of mine.
How can I refer to my previous paper completely anonymously so that
the reviewers cannot realize who is the author of the new paper?
I am insisting on this because I don't believe that there is such a thing as a completely unbiased peer-review process, even when double-blind. I am new in the field, and I can imagine that this is where a reviewer could have prejudices. Stupid reason, but I already have an unpleasant experience with this.
I cannot cite the paper by removing the author and retaining the title, as it would take 5 seconds for a computer-literate person to find the full record.
On the bright side, while the previous paper is easily accessible, the reviewers probably would not be aware of it because it is from a conference that is not really in that field. But still, they would manage to find it with some effort.
Would it be acceptable that I mention that this paper extends my previous research that cannot be cited in order to accomplish the anonymity of a double-blind peer-review, and that the citation will be added later?
I think there is no way to do that. If someone wants to find out who has written that paper, they will. I even know someone who is able to identify the reviewers by their style of writing / type of changes they propose. You just have to count on the person just not being interested in who you actually are or being as objective as possible.
This, to me, is the fundamental flaw of double-blind reviewing. If paper B builds on paper A while demonstrating a very deep understanding of A's results, it's extremely likely that the two papers were written by the same people, even if, in B, they diligently refer to the authors of "A" as "they" rather than "we".
New researchers often worry about these kinds of things (biased reviewers, people stealing their work, etc.). As you become more experienced, you realise that these things are very rare.
One other practice is to avoid referring to other authors as either "they" or "we", but only using their surnames. This is more feasible in some settings than others; in my field of mathematics it is often very easy to achieve with professional results (even if you talk about yourself in the third person). None of my last three papers seems to contain a "they" or "we" used to refer to authors of cited papers. There is still the issue that the author of your new paper may seem very familiar with the previous one, but there is no need to explicitly say that the previous work is yours.
If paper B builds on paper A while demonstrating a very deep understanding of A's results, it's extremely likely that the two papers were written by the same people — I suspect this is less likely than you think. I've read plenty of papers that built on and demonstrated very deep understanding of my work, that were not written by me (or my students). And I like to think I've done the same to other people's work.
@JeffE Yes, I don't think I quite nailed the point I was trying to make, especially since it's kinda hard to extend somebody's work without understanding it very well! People very often write a sequence of papers on very similar topic and it's often trivial to identify the group responsible for the paper. For example, all the early papers about a research operating system are going to have come from the group that built the OS; analyses of different aspects of the same large (but not CERN-large) dataset probably come from the group that gathered that data; etc.
Disclaimer: I work in a field in which double-blind reviewing is either completely absent or so rare that I have never encountered it.
Would it be acceptable that I mention that this paper extends my previous research that cannot be cited in order to accomplish the anonymity of a double-blind peer-review, and that the citation will be added later?
No, I don't see how that's possible. The principle that you must cite work that you use or build on -- no less so if it's yours -- seems much more basic than your desire to get genuinely double-blind refereeing. Moreover, if a paper continues previous work, can anyone sensibly evaluate its added value without having access to that previous work? I can't see how.
I am a new guy in the field, and I can imagine that this is where a reviewer could have prejudices. Stupid reason, but I already have an unpleasant experience with this.
When you self-identify your reasoning as "stupid", there's a clear opportunity to think it through again. The process of journal submission and publication has a non-negligible random component: it would be unwarranted to assume that an experience that you had once or twice will necessarily recur. Your desire to circumvent an unfair refereeing process seems premature. If you feel like you're being treated unfairly as a new researcher, there are more productive ways to react to this: make it more clear why your work is competitive with or superior to the work done by more established researchers. I don't know of any academic field in which journals systematically don't want to publish work by new researchers that they believe is better than prior work just because those researchers are new. It is also true, unfortunately, that new researchers can overestimate (and also underestimate!) the value of their work. It is hard to hear that the thing you slaved over for months and years is not good enough for a second-rate journal in your field. But it may be true nevertheless.
Let me say finally that I see a little irony in your approach: you lament your treatment as an unestablished researcher, but you are in fact more established than most people: you have published a paper that your present work builds on. My experience is that it is much easier to publish a second paper on the same topic in a reasonable journal than a first paper, just as it is easier for an artist to sell their second painting for a reasonable price than their first. In publishing the first paper, the journal has conferred on your work the important imprimatur of publishable value. Insisting on throwing that away will probably increase your chance of receiving "anti-newbie bias" in the evaluation of your followup work!
The standard practice in my field (i.e., psychology) where blind review is required is as follows:
Just cite your own previous work as if you were citing any other study that was not yours.
For example, if your name was Bob Smith and you published a study in 2015, and you are now writing a paper that builds on that study, you could write something like:
Smith (2015) recently extended research on X. The present study builds on the models proposed by Smith (2015) to ....
In a few other contexts, it can also be appropriate to black out some text with a note saying "hidden for purposes of blind review". I would not use this for references. But I have used it, for example, when I needed to state the specific university ethics board that reviewed a study.
Computer scientist here, exactly this. We tend to recognize that double-blind is best-effort. The authors shouldn't identify themselves, and the reviewers shouldn't try to identify authors. So 'We build on the models proposed by Smith (2015)...' is precisely the right thing to do.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.500059 | 2014-06-25T20:18:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23961",
"authors": [
"Dahliya Dwita",
"David Richerby",
"Dxia28",
"Hannah Wheatley",
"JeffE",
"Ludrew",
"Michael Ekstrand",
"Oswald Veblen",
"Shan Khan",
"The Almighty Bob",
"WDiniz",
"astinaam",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11007",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16086",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16122",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/212230",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/212271",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/212273",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64151",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64152",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64153",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64154",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64155",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"nourine a"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
21224 | Can I ask for co-authorship if I share code and am willing to help applying code to the problem?
Recently I have been asked to share some source code I have written
with another PhD student. I have developed and used the methods in
that source code for the purposes of my own research. The code will
save her approximately 2 months of development/testing. I'm prepared
also to offer additional help with data pre/post-processing & writing.
Given the above, am I entitled to ask for co-authorship?
Keep in mind that being a PhD student, most likely the decision will rest with her adviser. Many advisers take the point of view that co-authorship requires a substantial contribution to the paper. And the key word here is "substantial". My suspicion is that you probably won't get authorship, however I also don't think you are out of line to ask and in your situation, and in your case, I probably would. But can you "claim" co-authorship (as your question asks)? No, I don't think so.
@Matt Brenneman Thanks. I have renamed the question. The methods that are asked are really enablers for her research so I think that contribution is there.
It depends a lot on how much she uses your code too; Just because it was shared, does not mean it'll be useful in the end to her, or that her final result will be sufficiently close to what you developed to be able to ask. I'd say keep in touch, and let her know that you'd like to help.
@Matthew G. I was instructed to give her the source code, so she is expecting to receive help.
@qoobit FWIW, I'll just say two quick things: first, asking for authorship, in a case like this, depends a bit on the situation, the people involved, their motivations, etc. Secondly, "signficant"can be highly subjective. I remember a colleague having some terrible results he couldn't publish, and I came up with the key insight to explain his results (which was the entire basis for his paper),yet he thought my contribution was not "significant"
@Matt Brenneman Nasty case. Sorry to hear that.
I am using lots of computer programs in my research. They are certainly saving me more than 2 months of time — without those computer programs a lot of my research would be completely impossible. However, this does not mean that people who wrote those computer programs are my coauthors!
Along with your polite request of co-authorship, you could offer to actually help writing the paper, in particular the methods section, and an active participation to the overall writing.
@JukkaSuomela - Are you using programs that other researchers have written that aren't published in any form or released as open-source? That makes a big difference, just like any aspect of research. Using someone else's protocol from a published paper also doesn't make them a coauthor, but if they train you and help optimize it for your experiment, authorship may be warranted.
Related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20901/compiling-ethical-standards-for-coauthorship-across-academic-fields-and-regions
Make your code citable.
You can discuss with her and her advisor whether your help warrants authorship, but it would be rather unhelpful to refuse her even if she or her advisor declines. I would say, if this is true, (1) Sure! I'd love for more good research to come from my work! and (2) Since my project isn't published yet, we'll need to include a good description in the methods and it probably makes sense for me to be a coauthor.
If the target journal particularly advocates open-data and open-access, you might have to release your work in order for them to get it published. It's important to talk through first to make sure everyone's okay with that. In general it's a fantastic idea since it means that work is not so difficult to replicate, and if you have a valuable tool maybe others will benefit from it. But when you're laboring to finish your own work in time and worried about its perceived novelty, it can seem a little less appealing.
Just have the discussion (in a friendly manner) now so there aren't any unpleasant surprises later.
Code is (hopefully) now considered as part of the regular research work. Thus, it can:
be requested by reviewers,
providing it will raise the chances of the paper to get accepted.
But more important, it can be cited, especially when the authors of a paper relied on someone else's code.
What does it mean for you?
In your case, you have several options:
you should make your code publicly available. This way, it can be cited (at least under the form of an URL in the paper). If you make it available through Github, it can even by cited like any research work;
a nice complement to the first item would be to have a publication, even a short one, that presents the results of your code, or the way it was designed if it is very specific and worth sharing. That way, you can ask the users of your code to cite this paper when they use your code;
eventually, your co-authorship status will depend on your contribution to your paper.
I put a friend of mine (whose code saved me a few days, I would say around 1 week) in the acknowledgements section of a paper of mine. He told me it was already too much, but I didn't want him to go unnoticed/uncited. It was just a matter of being polite and thankful for me...
So, you are giving your colleague some of your research code to use on her own problem. If she ends up using, or trying to use it, then I predict two things.
(a) You will end up having to help her understand the code well enough to use it. This is very likely, amounting to practically a certainty.
(b) You will have to adapt the code to work on her problem. This is still very likely, but not quite as certain.
I'd say (b) definitely entitles you to co-authorship. (a) is not quite so clear. If you just give her the code and don't do anything else (in which case she is unlikely to be able to use the code) then you definitely aren't entitled to co-authorship.
Whatever you do, you could still be denied co-authorship. However, bear in mind that you cannot (in my opinion) reasonably withhold the code (that seems to me contrary to what research is about) but you are not required to work with your colleague on her problem for nothing. Therefore, if you do end up spending significant amounts of time working with your colleague on her problem, then bring up the issue of co-authorship early. If your colleague or her mentors don't want to give you co-authorship, then ask yourself why you would spend time working on this project.
You also say:
I'm prepared also to offer additional help with data pre/post-processing & writing.
This is a separate issue which I'm not addressing here. I have just focused on the involvement which will naturally stem from you providing your source code. If I understand your quote above correctly, this refers to optional assistance you are prepared to provide.
FWIW, I would add there are definitely deptl politics that may play a role in the problem. If you are a grad student yourself,I might suggest discussing the matter first with your adviser or supervisor or even just the wise old guy in the dept who people go to for advice in the dept
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.500794 | 2014-05-20T18:35:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21224",
"authors": [
"Bob Scheme",
"BurgerAutomata",
"Cape Code",
"Fomite",
"Jukka Suomela",
"Matt Brenneman",
"Matthew G.",
"Mattias Wallin",
"PROBERT",
"Prabhpreet",
"Rex Kerr",
"UnfabulousD",
"cfx",
"dbeauring",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10491",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1165",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15181",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58037",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58038",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58039",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58046",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58057",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58059",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58065",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58066",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58083",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/669",
"qoobit",
"sappjw"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
86130 | Is it a good idea to put detailed supplementary analyses to a publication on ArXiv or Zenodo?
I am often bothered by the fact that interesting information pertaining a manuscript ends up in the supplemental information because of constraints of space, formatting and narrative. It feels like wasting hard-earned results.
I am about to submit a paper which will be accompanied by supplemental information where I will put a very detailed analysis of some specific bit of the paper. This is too detailed to make it to the main text. Because I think they are nice results nonetheless and I would like to squeeze some juice out of them, I was thinking about putting the supplemental info as either an arXiv or Zenodo submission, which would assign it a DOI and thus make it citeable. It would make this info also more discoverable and accessible by someone who is interested in this part but not in the journal paper itself.
Is this a good idea or should I simply submit my extra data as regular supplemental info instead?
It is very common practice to create a MEGA version of your paper that contains all relevant material, even material that not necessary for the journal submission, to ArXiv.
@PsySp Not all journals are compatible with arXiv preprints. As a matter of fact, the ones I'm considering for this paper (which are published by the American Chemical Society) are not. So putting the main text on arXiv would preclude submission to these journals.
Would you be happy putting the supplemental material on a personal home page?
@aparente001 I would like the sup. info to have a DOI, that is the motivation to use a repository. My website would not offer this feature.
@Miguel: Do the journals even disallow postprints, i.e., posting your own version on arXiv after the paper has been accepted? Maybe with an embargo period? You can also check whether this policy of the journal is not overriden by applicable law (e.g., in France, the right for authors to deposit their works in repositories is guaranteed by law, under some conditions).
@a3nm I feel the discussion is barking up the wrong tree. Just to be clear: most journals (at least the ones I am dealing with) do not own copyright of supplemental material, only of the main text. What I do with the supplemental material is therefore up to me. My question is about getting the most out of my supplemental info, since I would not like for it to be only reachable through some obscure link on the journal's website.
@Miguel: If you are only asking about the supplementary material, then yes, I would think that it's great to deposit it, on arXiv or elsewhere, e.g., on Zenodo (which can host large data sets). It's just that if you do so, it's more convenient for readers if the main text of the paper is included also, so it's better to do it unless it is really disallowed in terms of copyright.
@a3nm Ok, I get you now. That sounds reasonable but it might be difficult to reuse the main text in practice.
Would a hybrid approach be helpful? It sounds like you want the DOI that comes with an arXiv (for example) upload, AND the easy-to-find aspect of posting on something like a personal home page. If you put code on e.g. arXiv, the documentation at the top could include a link to your home page, where you would hopefully have a pdf of the published paper. Please correct me if I've misunderstood anything.
As far as I know, arXiv uploads do not get assigned DOIs. See https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62480/why-does-arxiv-org-not-assign-dois which seems to still be the case.
If the journals you want to submit your work are not "ArXiv-compatible" you have few options:
1)Put the excluded material in the appendix of the arxiv submission.
2)Make a write-up, put it on your web-page, and cite it in the arxiv paper.
3)Create a technical report (with a time stamp) and cite it in your article.
I think the time-stamp feature is critical here.
Normally I expect that the Journal would host supplementing information. If the amoutn and content is significant (e.g. complicated new method), then publishing an extra article should be possible in another journal and referencing that. And nobody keeps you from putting the preprint online as you would do usually.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.501367 | 2017-03-07T23:18:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86130",
"authors": [
"Miguel",
"Nate Eldredge",
"PsySp",
"a3nm",
"aparente001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14695",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17423",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46816"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
16723 | Is there anything special to the CV format for PhD applicants in Germany?
I want to pursue my PhD program in Germany. Is there any special format for academic CV to for applying there?
No, there is no special format for an academic CV in Germany. In general, CVs in Germany differ somewhat of Angloamerican CVs (see for example this newspaper article by The Local). It might be the case, that German professors and selection committees expect a more German CV. However, that should not be a boundary, as academia in Germany is internationally oriented. The Career Center of the RWTH Aachen offers an English information sheet about German CVs that might be helpful. In addition, you could use the European CV from the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training as an orientation.
The format listed at the RWTH link is only appropriate for students before they get to the PhD; it's a resumé, not a CV. The two formats are different.
@aeismail That's right. At Post-doc level you would typically find the same CV style in Germany like in the US. The OP asked about a CV for a PhD admission.
The linked The Local article says "leave out any description of personal qualities, interests and hobbies". That seems to be oddly in contrast to the comments on this workplace.se question, where it was companies in Anglo-Saxon countries that were described as not being interested in any not directly job-related qualities, while such personal qualities and the like were rather the norm to be included in various other European countries such as Germany.
@O.R.Mapper More precisely, Gerhard Winkler advises in The Local to cut the "personal" stuff. He freelances as a consultant for job applicants and generally favours clear and simple resumés. Thus, there are surely others in Germany who would advise to add such a section about personal qualities and interests, especially for young job applicants. In my experience, however, Winkler's advice is better suited for the academic labour market in Germany. Of course, selection committees are interested in voluntary work and experiences related to the field of research.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.501712 | 2014-02-09T11:22:07 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16723",
"authors": [
"Back2Basics",
"Eskery",
"Lisa",
"Luke",
"Musa Morena",
"Nat Green",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Onkar Singh",
"aeismail",
"guest",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45054",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45055",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45056",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45059",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45155",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45189",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80654",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80655",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80656",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8067",
"non-numeric_argument",
"suriya sethu"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
80320 | Do most customers choose predatory publishers knowingly?
In this comment, it was claimed:
Predatory publishers thrive because when you apply for a job or a grant, few read your papers. They check the papers you pinpoint and the number of publcations. That's where these publishers step on and that's why people choose them. Not because they don't know. Of course there might be a few accidentally doing it, like the OP in this question, but most of the people who are in academia for a while select them only to increase faster their publication list.
By contrast, I cannot remember a single case of somebody reporting their experience with such publisher on this very site that submitted a paper to a predatory publisher knowingly (except for exposing them). Now, there is no denying that there is a strong bias here since people who intentionally choose a predatory publisher are less likely to admit it or ask questions here.
So, I am curious: Is there any data or good argument to support the claim that people who publish with predatory publishers are aware that they are not publishing with a regular scientific publisher?
Imo the comment merely states that the authors are aware that these publishers trade a lower standard of quality for a faster review process and a higher acception rate. They are not necessarily aware of the "predatory" label. And low-impact factor journals are not all predatory either.
@T.Verron: I disagree with your interpretation of that comment. Anyway, this question does not depend on this. Also, I am aware of the distinction between a low-impact journal and a predatory one – this question is exclusively about predatory ones.
I can only add anecdotal information. One of the people on my team regularly and enthusiastically passes on to me the automated "solicitations" from "journals" that (to me) are obviously fraudulent, asking if we should write the review or whatever that the "journal" requests; fully believing the offer to be sincere, in spite of me repeatedly pointing out that the "journal" is fake. English is her third language and I can only assume that the obvious red flags are not as obvious to her. Without my input, she would certainly have submitted articles unknowingly.
Indeed, I was refering to low standard, fast review, high acceptance rate journals. Besides, lists like Beall's list reports "Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers", so (in my perspective at least) the term predatory can be ambiguous. It's true that inexperienced authors might be inclined to submit to a journal sending repeated invitations (probable predatory), but I think everyone most probably has a more experienced colleague to get advise from. If the (very interesting) data in the very nice answer provided below show something is that
... new authors have higher chance to pick a "predatory" or low quality journal. But they don't show their motivation. It could be because "I can publish quick and boost my publication list" or because "I received an invitation but I didn't know they are low quality". But I think we are in an environment where we can investigate the quality of the journal we select either by asking our colleagues like @iayork or by searching more thoroughly the right lists. Sorry, but I still can't exclude the first motivation...
And to end my mumbling... most biomed works have several authors. It can't be that all of them have no publications at all...
There is some circumstantial evidence against the claim that most people who publish with predatory publishers are aware that they are not publishing with a regular scientific publisher.
Many authors of papers published in predatory journals are inexperienced with academic publication. From [1]:
The majority of authors who publish in predatory journals have no other publications, whereas the second largest group consists of authors with fewer than five journal publications elsewhere; very few authors have published more than 10 articles. In contrast, the histogram reveals that group 2 authors, those who publish in OA journals that have a robust review process and subsequently rejected Bohannon's false submission, generally have a stronger publication record. With the exception of a few new authors, most group 2 authors have published journal articles previously; in fact, some authors have published more than 30 articles.
(Group-1 journals are open-access journals with low-quality or no peer review; group-2 journals are open-access journals that have more rigorous peer-review process than the journals in group 1. All are biomedical-science journals.)
Many prospective authors are unfamiliar with predatory journals and unaware of predatory practices in the academic publishing industry.
In a survey of 145 medical and veterinary science participants in a scientific writing workshop [2]:
Thirty-four of 142 (23.9%) respondents were aware of the DOAJ; 7/143 (4.8%) were aware of Beall’s list, 33/143 (23.0%) were aware of the term “predatory journal”, and 24/142 (16.9%) were aware of the Science article about predatory journals.
In another (very small) survey of U.S.-based authors who published in criminal-justice journals on Beall’s list [3]:
Just under half (44%; 4 respondents) of the respondents had heard of the “Scholarly Open Access List” and one-third of the respondents had heard of the term “Predatory Journal.” Furthermore, all but one of the respondents was not aware that they had published an article in a journal associated with the predatory journal list. One respondent questioned the accuracy of their association with a predatory journal, and stated
… should not be on the list. They had more referees than any other journal I’ve pursued and I’m [the] author of 20 peer reviewed papers (sic).
References:
[1]: Xia J, Harmon JL, Connolly KG, Donnelly RM, Anderson MR, Howard HA. Who publishes in “predatory” journals?. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2015 Jul 1;66(7):1406-17. DOI: 10.1002/asi.23265
[2]: Christopher MM, Young KM. Awareness of “Predatory” open-access journals among prospective veterinary and medical authors attending scientific writing workshops. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2015;2. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2015.00022
[3]: Noga-Styron KE, Olivero JM, Britto S. Predatory Journals in the Criminal Justices Sciences: Getting our Cite on the Target. Journal of Criminal Justice Education. 2016 Jul 8:1-8. DOI: 10.1080/10511253.2016.1195421
Good answer although quite surprising to me. Your references are a few years old, and since then at least in my environment, people are much more aware of predatory publishers than they used to be only two to three years back.
Considering there are hundreds of thousands of papers published in predatory journals, it stretches belief that all the authors of those papers aren't aware of what they're doing. Increasingly, it seems like there's a supply and demand situation here: academics need to get published (demand), so predatory publishers provide the means to do so (supply). See this article by the New York Times about it, and references within (especially this one).
This article has a section about big pharmaceutical companies that publish with OMICS, a publisher widely regarded as predatory. The author was not able to ascertain if the pharmaceutical companies are aware of OMICS' shady reputation, but finds it's not impossible that they are, and are just looking for quick and easy ways to publish. For example, Pfizer published an article about the costs (in dollars) of severe back pain, which would probably have been rejected by the leading medical journals because of cost studies are notoriously unreliable.
This article claims "[some German] scientists appear to have taken advantage of the lack of editorial oversight ... to report their results quickly and without the risk of rejection."
As one might guess it's not an easy topic to get accurate data on, because nobody is going to claim they knowingly published in a predatory journal because they wanted to report their results quickly and without risk of rejection.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.501970 | 2016-11-23T11:41:18 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/80320",
"authors": [
"BioGeo",
"Snijderfrey",
"T. Verron",
"Wrzlprmft",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111956",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26671",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4474",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62976",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"iayork"
],
"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
} |
16237 | Advisor's bad decision results in co-authored mediocre publication. How to prevent this from ruining my career?
I happen to be involved in this project in which my advisor has made such a bad decision that the result turned out to be mediocre/uninteresting. While I am not the lead author, I will be one of the co-author for this. In that case, why should I endorse for my advisor's bad decision, when I don't have any means to change the course of this project? I know I won't look as bad as the first author, but still this will be one of my publication. I doubt my advisor will say something like this in the rec: "Oh yes, the bad publication was my idea, my student just followed my direction." How can I prevent this from ruining my future career?
Just because a result is uninteresting does not mean that it is unpublishable / unworthy. This is what happens in research!
Personally, I can't imagine that being coauthor on an uninteresting paper could "ruin your future career" or even damage it significantly; a paper is a paper, so I think at worst it has a very small positive value. To actually be a negative, the paper would have to be horrifically wrong or plagiarized or something.
Also, not to question your judgment, but you do probably have a lot less experience in the field than your advisor. It's just possible that the project is more interesting to the community than it seems to you; when you're deep in a project, it's often hard to see the context that it fits in to. Consider discussing the project with other researchers in the field (check with your advisor first to make sure you're not giving away too many details too soon), and see what they think.
Even if the project is really worthless, as I said, I don't see it actively damaging your career. Just wrap it up, get it out the door, and start working on something more interesting!
My advisor would say whatever him do is interesting and he did that all the time.in the end, it's student work for him wasting time on his trivial topic. I can only expect more trivial topic coming from my advisor than anyone else.
So stop whining and find a new advisor.
As Nate Eldredge wrote in his final sentence, stop worrying about the past project and start thinking about your next project.
You will be judged much more strongly based on your more recent work so just make sure that your upcoming work is more interesting. You cannot change the past so don't spend time worrying about it. You should spend your time on your future.
One uninteresting publication is not going to sink you unless the science is bad. If it shows you do not know how to do research that might hurt you. If the science is really bad, you might consider removing your name from the paper but since you only complain about the results being uninteresting, let it be and move on to something better.
Judging by your past five questions (in fact, every question that you asked on here), you clearly have issues with your advisor.
I doubt that your advisor is actually that bad. No one can be that bad, and survive academia. It is most likely the product of your not actually caring about your advisor's interests (and vice versa), and the lack of communication between the two of you.
If there is still some time left, I recommend that you seek out another advisor instead of ranting about your advisor on academia.SE, which doesn't actually solve your problems in real-life.
If you are close to graduating, I suggest that you "pay your dues" to your advisor; he let you use his lab and equipment, not to mention granting you access to his expertise, for the past 5+ years. The least you can do is to "suck it up" and pretend to care about your advisor's interests (and put some work into it). After all, you'll need your advisor's letter to stay in academia!
While other ppl can use big toy in the lab, My advisor treat me like a office lady helping him do all the data processing so my name can hang somewhere in the paper. My advisor is all new but he act like a boss and create knowledge that don't sell.
Any chance of a goo rec suck it up?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.502549 | 2014-01-28T00:58:38 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16237",
"authors": [
"Aleksey Belikov",
"Fabis",
"JeffE",
"Kalle Piik",
"Marcos Lima",
"Shimon Haber",
"ashensw",
"golanor",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10694",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11084",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42568",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42569",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42570",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42571",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42572",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42573",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42574",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42575",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42583",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42591",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"jeremy simon",
"nagniemerg",
"user10694",
"user42568",
"were"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
16220 | Is it acceptable to use mainly websites in a literature review?
I'm writing a literature review for a project and due to the nature of the project (website and database) I haven't used any books etc. I have used a number of websites to get information on subjects such as hosting a website and a database using Azure, is it acceptable to use websites in a literature review?
Why do you think a website would NOT be acceptable in a literature review?
Because of the word literature. Look at the answers below
I think the better question would be "How can I identify reasonable websites to use in my literature review?" At which point Penguin_Knight's answer is perfect.
Website or not website is not the point. Printed journal articles are favored over website because i) they are peer-reviewed, carrying some degree of authority, ii) they are archived and retrievable, with payment or free of charge, and iii) once published, the contents do not change until they are formally revised, rebuked, or retracted.
So, it would mean that when citing websites, a few more steps need to be done to increase their worthiness. First, you'd need to assess the credibility of the website and be able to critically evaluate the contents. In journal articles this step is done to some degree but in websites you're on your own. Second, you may need to do most of the archiving (including downloading, dating, and archiving the data sets you may download, or printing and dating website into PDFs, etc.) or use website archiving to save a cross-section of the websites. There are free services like http://perma.cc and http://www.webcitation.org available.
Once they are archived, in your paper, it is a good practice to cite both original link and the archived link as well as the date you accessed the original link. For details, consult the project leader or editor. Some journals specialized in publishing Internet-related research such as Journal of Medical Internet Research may also provide useful format-related examples in their guide to the authors.
You can definitely put into references the official user documentation of your web server and database engine, as this software have not been just invented by you from scratch.
While websites can also be used in references, it seems to me that you may need more in depth coverage. Try to Google and find some real publications. If the topic seems too broad, it should be some reviews. If there is a Wikipedia article, check which references it uses.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.503003 | 2014-01-27T10:24:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16220",
"authors": [
"Alex Measday",
"Arka Mallik",
"Mohammed Al-Haddad",
"Nuno",
"Ronan",
"Vitaliy",
"earthling",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11229",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42520",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42521",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42522",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42535",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42540",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42587",
"lucag"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
21527 | How many times can you present the same material at different conferences before it becomes stale?
I just finished my PhD in Mathematics and am in between my PhD and postdoc positions. I was very fortunate to have the ability to present my research to seminars and conferences over the last couple of years. My complete results all reduce to a standard storyline and I feel like I have spoken about it to various audiences a lot, especially the specialists in my field. I have a conference coming up with the specialists again and I am a bit concerned about giving a talk that is just a minor mutation from the talks before.
My question is therefore:
How long can one talk about the same material in the conference loop until the talk becomes stale?
Is a repertoire of multiple research talks expected of a recent PhD?
I have removed the questions not directly related to "overexposure" - please post them as separate questions.
My PI still talks about isodesmic reactions; it's the central figure of our group's research. If you have a specific interest, do new things with it, but keep talking about what drives you.
How long can one talk about the same material in the conference loop until the talk becomes stale?
As other answers have pointed out, certainly the answer is not going to be "N months" for any value of N. Here are some things to think about:
1) You say that "my complete results all reduce to a standard storyline". Yes, but that's true for entire subfields of mathematics. I like to tell the story about how I heard a close friend in grad school give a talk about his thesis work just as he graduated. I heard him speak again when he came back to visit almost a year later. As we were catching up afterwards, I somehow let on my surprise that he gave essentially the same talk both times. He looked at me in disbelief and told me "There was hardly a single result in common between those two talks". It turned out that -- not withstanding that we were both arithmetic geometers -- I simply didn't have enough knowledge in his subfield of speciality to penetrate far enough beyond the standard storyline -- Galois representations, big rings, some filtered semilinear algebra, perhaps an R = T theorem... -- to see what was new about the second talk, despite the fact that an expert would say that it was all new. I have found this to be one of the more profound experiences of my professional life and I tell it often in a variety of contexts: e.g. I mentioned it to a linear algebra student who said that she was largely following the lectures but sometimes was having trouble understanding the differences between what we were doing from week to week. When you tell an undergraduate a parable, it's probably safest to spill the beans and tell them the moral: I recognized her perception as an indication that she was farther away from engaging with the material than she herself realized. In your case the moral is admittedly a little less clear, but I think that part of it is that we can build a highly successful academic career by hewing largely to a "standard storyline": the devil, and thus also the glory, is in the details.
2) So I have a question: is your concern about giving cognate talks or literally giving essentially the same talk over and over again? Let me assume the latter. It's harder to know how often you should simply repeat yourself, and I am wary of giving advice because I know myself to be close to one end of the spectrum: I don't usually travel around and gave the same talk multiple times. The one time I really remember the feeling of repeating a talk more than once was when I was on the tenure track job market, when I did it four times in a couple of months. The last time I gave that talk, it indeed did feel stale and I remember not getting much in the way of feedback from the audience...and then I got offered the job. I am much more likely to want to take every given talk as an opportunity to speak about what's on my mind that month or that week: this is not necessarily a good thing, but I try to make it work.
I think though that you are rightly concerned about giving the same talk to largely the same audience of specialists. When that starts happening, might you not simply be speaking too much? One thing to do is look around: if you're in the same group of specialists, they are also speaking frequently, I guess. Do you observe others around you -- at a similar career stage and also those who are more senior -- largely "repeating themselves" in the talks they give? (Sometimes a really good talk is worth repeating. I remember fondly having heard Manjul Bhargava talk about the "15 Theorem" at least twice, probably three times. Each time I grasped the picture more fully and thus liked it even more. Obviously Manjul could have talked about other work; he chose to revisit this amazingly beautiful well, and his insistence on promoting his own good taste has had such a positive role in influencing later mathematical work, including some of mine.)
Here's a piece of advice: when someone invites you to give a talk, before you accept or decline, ask them what they have in mind for you to speak of (be ready to follow up immediately with a list of options). If you think that the person who is inviting you to speak has heard you speak about the same topic before, or if a lot of the audience feels the same way, ask them explicitly about that.
Another thing to do is to consciously update your "standard talk" to reflect recent changes in your thinking about your research. You're right that a talk is a story, and the story can change even if the core results remain the same. Reinterpreting your past successes in terms of what you're doing presently and are trying to do in the very near future is a big part of research. I have heard James Maynard speak about bounded gaps between primes; I would gladly hear him speak again, even if I were a seamless expert on his paper on the topic (note the subjunctive!) just to hear at the end of his talk what he is thinking about now.
Is a repertoire of multiple research talks expected of a recent PhD?
Multiple disjoint talks? No, probably not. It is not too soon to start working on a "non-research talk", i.e., a much friendlier broader talk that you could give to undergraduates, but I think that's not what you're speaking about. I do think that having multiple projects is a good thing even for a young mathematician nowadays, but one does not want to sacrifice breadth at the expense of depth. If you have basically one research talk that you've given half a dozen times or more over a period of a couple of years, by now that one talk is probably really good. I would concentrate on further refining and updating that one great talk rather than just feeling you should start from scratch in order to show "multiplicity". (Again, I am conscious of being unusually lured by the siren song of multiplicity. Oh, well: we all need to identify the good career advice which is not good for us.)
It's important also to look at your audience. If you're likely to be giving the same talk to two audiences that overlap significantly, then the time between talks is less important than the fact that the audiences will perceive the talk as 'stale'.
For example, you might give a talk at a general interest conference, and then a slightly modified version of it at a workshop with specialists, many of whom may not have attended the general interest conference. That would be fine. You might then go on the colloquium circuit and give the talk at venues with only small overlap with the specialist group.
But if you gave the same (or similar) talk to the same (or similar) audience more than once, that would be a problem.
Excellent point. It's OK to give the same talk when there is little overlap between audiences (either because of geography, or because the main topic of the conference is very different).
A recently minted PhD would not typically be expected to have multiple seminar-length talks at her disposal, because in general the PhD work should be presentable as an integrated whole. However, once one starts getting substantially into the postdoc phase and beyond, one should have more than one research talk available, as there is greater diversity in one's portfolio of work.
With respect to "staleness," this is also somewhat of a concern, but only partially. Research progresses in time, but that doesn't mean the older work is made irrelevant (or unimportant for audiences to know about). However, you should revisit your talks periodically (before you give them, of course) to determine what is still "fresh," and what is already well-known enough to gloss over in less detail.
As for assigning a "shelf life," that really depends a lot on your field. Some fields progress much faster than others, so a blanket statement such as "never talk about results that are more than a year old" is unlikely to be helpful.
Presumably you can improve the talk each time you give it. Even if the core mathematical results are the same, you could perhaps ...
Make the notation cleaner or more consistent
Improve the motivation — explain better why your results are important
Add pictures/diagrams to illustrate the ideas.
Add new example uses of your results.
Add new connections to other results, especially very recent ones.
Add new ideas about future extensions.
Add some related open problems.
Add some discussion of attempted solutions that didn’t work.
Remove material that you’ve found to be incomprehensible except to a few specialists, based on previous talks.
For conference talks, this shouldn't be too much of a problem - fully outlining a complicated paper is very difficult in ten minutes, and often leaves listeners confused as you've tried to cover too much information in too little time. I've given a few talks on my dissertation work, which is based on relaxing a particular assumption in competitive strategy (that substitute technologies are mutually exclusive), by altering how a simple utility function is modeled (decomposing it into a summation). Trying to get through all the implications of that in ten minutes, as simple as the core idea is, is just too much. But focusing on a single point can still get audiences excited.
I've given a talk on the tension between creating the single best technology, or making a technology that is still useful even if a buyer has already adopted another technology. That is 2-3 pages of the paper, but is enough of an idea that the audience can walk away knowing they've learned something new, and can think about things in a new way. Another talks about indirect complementarity - where two technologies appear to be substitutes, but behave as compliments in the presence of a third technology. That's another few pages, but another single point that audiences can take away, knowing they've learned something. A third presentation is the empirical test of my idea, which is context specific, and requires a bit of explanation to highlight 1-2 more key points. Each of these is part of the same story line, but each still represents a distinct takeaway - and if your audience takes away one new thing from each talk, that's quite the accomplishment compared to most talks. This is especially true if talking to specialists, who know enough of the background for you to focus on mechanisms in isolation, with some depth, to convey something new. For a general audience, I would still think about how to concisely convey the big picture, and then focus in on one piece of information you want to be sure they get out of the presentation, even if it's not to the same depth as you could get to with a specialist audience. This allows you to keep things fresh over time, and also ensures you understand the phenomena enough to communicate the component pieces clearly.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.503245 | 2014-05-27T21:29:15 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21527",
"authors": [
"Floris",
"Jonathan E. Landrum",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15062",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7134"
],
"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
} |
42630 | What percentage of PhD candidates drop out in computer science?
I'd like to know what percentage of PhD candidates in Computer Science does not graduate with a PhD and thus drops out of their PhD program.
This number probably varies quite a bit for different countries (e.g., in Continental Europe one usually has to have a Master's degree before being eligible to start with a PhD, while in the US one can "drop out" with a Master's degree) and possibly also for different sub-fields; I'm mostly interested about German speaking countries (Germany, Austria, Switzerland) and PhD candidates with a focus in Algorithms and/or Theory, but any answer "x% in this subfield in that country/at that university" are also welcome.
Background story:
Currently thinking hard whether I should go for a PhD in Algorithms at a German speaking university and not a 100% sure if it is the right thing for me. A professor (not the one I'd do the PhD with) urged me to at least give it a try and said that there is always the possibility to drop out if it isn't working out.
I don't really see how your question will help you in your background story decision. Knowing whether 30% or 70% of total strangers drop out of similar-but-different programs in similar-but-different countries will yield a very weakly informative prior at best. Better to think about what you want/need to do.
It's worth distinguishing between different sorts of dropping out. One Ph.D. student might love their academic work and do very well at it but decide to drop out to run a start-up or accept an exciting and high-paying job in industry. Another Ph.D. student may dislike their academic work, do poorly, and eventually leave to take a pedestrian job they could have started immediately after college. These are radically different experiences, which shouldn't be conflated.
While I agree that knowing the information may not be useful for the background story, I disagree that the question is too broad. There maybe a nice comprehensive study out there that has collected and analyized the data. I don't think an answer needs to be a book, nor do I think we need tones of answers (I.e., one for each university and department).
The Times Higher Education looked at PhD completion rates in the UK. In the UK, PhD programs are nominally 3 years long, and the Times reported that, averaged across all fields, 70% of students obtain a PhD within 7 years. They predict that 80% of students who start a PhD in the UK will obtain one within 25 years. There are some data for MIT students which shows completion rates asymptote at around 80% after about 8-10 years. There is a fair amount of variability across fields in how quickly the asymptote is reached (e.g., the average PhD in Business is short compared to Medicine), but in all fields about 80% of students obtain a PhD. I was not able to find any numbers for German universities or CS specifically.
These numbers, however, leave out the substantial number of students who stick out grad school because they do not want to "fail". While trying out grad school might sound good in theory, just make sure you are the type of person willing to drop out if it is not right for you.
"leaver out the substantial number of students who stick out grad school" - so they just stick around until eventually a PhD certificate finds its way on their desk?
@mort the people who are "sticking it out" continue to work at their PhD, often harder than the people who want to continue in research, but they tend to hate (maybe too strong of a word) a good portion of their life. It is kind of like training for a marathon. Some people give up on their first training run, others enjoy the training and the race, despite it being hard work, and go on to do other marathons, and a third group complete the training and run the race despite hating it. Most of the third group never run again, but a few change their mind when they get to the finish line.
The completion percent will vary between universities.
For USA, I can introduce you to the NCES ( National Center for Education Statistics). All univeristies are required to report information each year about the university students, faculty, salaries, demographics, degrees, retention, etc.
There are many data tools within NCES. You might find the IPEDS tool (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System) most helpful for your question. It allows you to pick specific universities and examine data.
I do not know if the countries you mention have similar data collection systems.
Many students complete the course work but do not finish the degree. This is know as All But Dissertation (ABD). I don't know if you want to count these folks as they haven't officially dropped out. However they have not ( and several will not) complete their dissertation.
As far as I can tell, the needed data are absent. At the University level I can see how many graduate students enrolled in a given year and how many graduate degrees were issued in a year, but some students may get multiple graduate degrees (e.g., an MD-PhD student who gets an MS and MPhil along the way). Ignoring that, I would still need to track incoming students and outgoing students over a couple of year period. While there is some field specific graduation data, there is no field specific data about number of incoming students.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.504134 | 2015-03-30T13:12:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42630",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"John S",
"Kathy Dilks",
"Ruri",
"Savage47",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"StrongBad",
"glowkeeper",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115424",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115426",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115429",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115432",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115437",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115472",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115500",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13427",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"mort",
"rikisa",
"t0pp4",
"toraritte"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
36735 | Professor/supervisor switches from writing emails in his native and local language to English - how to react?
A professor of mine, who's native language is German and who is teaching a class in English in a German speaking country, suddenly answered an e-mail which I wrote in German (I'm a native German speaker too), in English. I'm wondering why he does that? What the proper way for me to react is, i.e., should I use English when sending him e-mails from now on?
I'm aware that I have (technically) asked two questions. However, I think that the second one can not be answered properly without answering the first.
It's very normal. My prof were acting same. Maybe its the way they want to teach students about official English language. It was useful for me to know how to email other foreign professors or answer reviewers. @mort
My French and Japanese professors both use their native languages when communicating about topics for class (mass emails to the class, assignments, etc). For communication where they feel it is imperative that the student(s) understand and that there is no mistake, they use English (our native language). I have found that they use it to encourage students to practice the language(s) they are learning. I also see no difference in the faculty-to-faculty communication who share the same native language. For the most part they use English, holding to the same standard they set for students.
English is The Law! I spent 10 years studying German and now I don't have to use it at all. Except for watching American movies dubbed in German on YouTube sometimes. Now seriously - answer in English of course. Exercise your English = profit! You know German anyway!
Could you clarify if the professor is teaching a technical class? As Massimo Ortolano answered below, technical jargon is largely composed of English loanwords and proficient English speakers often prefer to switch the language entirely if it becomes distracting.
The class is very technical; however, the e-mails I exchanged with the professor were not at all technical.
I wouldn't worry about it too much: given the bilingual nature of his work, your professor probably context-switches back and forth between languages frequently. If the professor is very comfortable in both languages, they might not have even realized the switch, e.g., if responding to your email in the middle of a large block of work in English with their head in "English-mode".
If you want, however, next time you see the professor in person, you might ask if they have any preference for language in their communications with you: it could easily go either way (e.g., in English to make forwarding to non-German speakers easier, in German for personal comfort, or even no preference at all).
+1 for "English mode". That happens more than monolinguists might imagine. The professor might not even realize he changed languages on you.
+1 I have 4 closest colleagues (plus me it's 5). I speak: CZ, EN, (FR), my supervisor speaks DE, EN, FR, my mate speaks IT, DE, EN, FR, my supervisor's mate speaks IT, FR, the teamleader speaks FR, EN. We seem to constantly switch between four languages, and as far as nobody says something that someone else wants to understand but is unable to, we seem to ignore the melange.
I agree that when you can use English fluently, frequently you will recall jargon faster in English (English mode as you say). However, that mode works for jargon only, I think. How can you forget normal words like I, you, this, that? If the professor of the OP's respond is a mixture of English and German, I can understand. I still don't understand why he switchs the language completely.
As Jake said, this does happen more often than monolingual people would realize. Changing languages is not simply a matter of changing the specific words involved, but the entire grammar and mindset behind the sentence. (Or: Changing of language is not thing only of changing each word individually but more of requires structures grammatical different and a mode mental different. See?) More surprisingly, the ability to seamlessly change from one language to another requires a surprising amount of fluency in both, much beyond what's required to live and work in either.
Another +1. My wife is a native speaker of Chinese and speaks passable English. If she's around other Chinese-speakers it's not all unusual for her to speak to me in Chinese--despite the fact that I speak only a few words of Chinese. She knows I can't understand it, she just doesn't realize she's speaking the wrong language until I stop her.
@Ooker switching languages takes a lot of effort. I prefer to stick to one language and not switch for short tasks like writing an email, and switch back again. It is not a matter of forgetting words (though my native tongue has suffered since I live abroad), but more a matter of avoiding switching between languages.
Once me and my friend were talking, me in one language, he in another. It went on like that for quite a while, we didn't realize what we were doing until his girlfriend interrupted us laughing hysterically.
To somewhat back this up and offer some other explanation why this might have happened: I sometimes accidentally answer or comment questions written in German (my native language) on the German Language SE in English, just because for example I briefly looked at a related question written in English. (Also, if watching a movie in English, my wife and I (both native speakers of German) often find ourselves talking about it in English.)
Switching does not always take effort and can happen unconsciously. I've even asked, in Japanese, whether the person I was speaking to understood English in reference to a sentence I had just said in Japanese but had sincerely thought I'd said in English (we both laughed really hard a moment later once it was apparent what had happened). Consider driving on the "other" side of the road: your own memory of which side you were on in an event can get mixed up based on your locale when remembering. Sometimes I'm unsure what language a book was in that I've read over a year ago. Give him a break.
@E.P. I wonder if it's the level of fluency that determines whether someone finds it easy to switch or not. I find myself constantly switching languages: documenting or programming in English while talking to colleagues in my local language. I even tend to take notes in English during a meeting in my native tongue.
suddenly answered an e-mail which I wrote in German [...], in English. I'm wondering why he does that?
He might think that since the official language of the class is English, all communications should be carried out in this language. Or, maybe, if you're asking a technical question, he prefers to use English to avoid confusion between the technical terms employed during the lessons and the corresponding German terms.
should I use English when sending him e-mails from now on?
Given that the official language is English, this should arise no complain on his part. But you can also ask which is his preferred choice between the two languages, given that you are a native German speaker.
In Italy, I teach in a couple of courses which are taught in English: many of the emails I receive from Italian students are written in English, and I typically answer in that language. It's a good practice for both.
This is essentially what I addressed in my comment on the question, +1! It's almost a standard in my department (Modern Languages and Literature) that faculty encourage students to practice the language they are learning.
I would not interpret too much into this. I have to deal with such questions (in which language should I write an email?) almost daily in my function as an assistant professor. My native language is German, but I teach at a Dutch university (some courses are in Dutch, some are in English). With Dutch students, I usually communicate in Dutch (a language which I speak at near-native level), with international students in English - but when it comes to Germans, it already becomes complicated: It seems natural to communicate in German, but at the same time, although German is my native language, it is sometimes just easier to express a thought in a language I use daily in research (English) or teaching (Dutch or English).
Second, I sometimes write in a specific language in order to be able to forward, (B)CC or archive the mails. It's just not very practical if you cannot share something with a colleague because of language issues. Also the other way round, you sometimes copy/paste things without wasting time on translating things.
Third, I honestly am sometimes just unaware of the language i use. If I just have been talking in one language with a colleague, I might use that one in a mail that as well, without it being a concious choice. The hard part of working in several languages are not the languages themselves, it's switching between languages.
So, I would not put too much weight into this issue. However, it might also be that the professor wants to make a statement: I have some colleagues who want to make a statement by communicating only in a courses "official" language to avoid the impression that they would differentiate between students.
But, of course you can just ask what language the professor prefers. I get these questions occasionally, and - to be honest - I usually don't care too much.
I live in Germany since long ago.
On my experience, German are doing this mostly because 3 reasons:
they won't worry because of your (for them) bad German.
they are suspecting, your German is bad and maybe your English is better. It happens mainly on noisy phone lines, where they suspect mostly lingual problems and seldom acoustic.
they only want to train their English (which they can't do with other Germans, but with a foreigner). Talking on German with a foreigner doesn't have any benefit for them, but talking on English means a possibility to a little bit of free training.
I think that the difference between the native and a non-native language is always very strong and prof always knew if they changed it. Maybe it is possible if he replied his twentieth mail on the day to his undergrads and all of them communicated with him either of German or on English with various levels.
In your place I replied to the prof on English, but mentioned on the first row some like this: "Ich würde gerne weiters mit Ihnen auf Deutsch kommunizieren" (I would be glad to communicate on German with you).
It's standard to respond in the language being taught to give the students opportunities to practice the use of said language.
This is even more important if the students feel uncomfortable using the language.
No pain no gain, as they say.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.504609 | 2015-01-13T21:24:59 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/36735",
"authors": [
"Anh Pham",
"Bobby",
"Chris Cirefice",
"Dai",
"Daruiod",
"E.P.",
"Jonathan E. Landrum",
"Lilienthal",
"Loren Pechtel",
"Maarten Buis",
"Ooker",
"Ralph Felix",
"SAH",
"Sharon Honore",
"The Bird",
"Wrzlprmft",
"Zingam",
"astrochoi",
"dtldarek",
"harada",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100146",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100147",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100150",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100151",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/106385",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12061",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13156",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13427",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15360",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15370",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27840",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5840",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7134",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/820",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8294",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99816",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99818",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99824",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99825",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99826",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99828",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99909",
"kanoo",
"marshal craft",
"mort",
"stevegt",
"yo'",
"zxq9"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
18692 | What kinds of reference letters sound best to letter readers?
Since I'm only starting my mathematical career, I've only ever requested letters from my advisers. So I was wondering what kinds of letters sound good to people reading reference letters? How does a neutral but good reference from a famous researcher compare against a strong letter from someone not-as-well-known?
This is admittedly very situation dependent and subjective. But I thought I'd solicit opinions anyway, since they're always interesting to read.
Edit: I'd appreciate it if you could share your personal experience too. When you were on a faculty hiring committee, PhD/postdoc admissions committee or anything else, what sort of letters had the most effect on you?
Reference letters for what? Summer internships? Graduate school? Postdocs? Faculty positions? Tenure?
@JeffE, my interest is mostly in postdocs, faculty positions and early career grants.
For the targets you mention, the perception of the letter is highly biased by prior familiarity with the letter writer. It's very common to say things like "Well Prof. X doesn't like anyone, so if they call this person 'decent' they must be pretty awesome", or "Prof. Y loves everyone, so this letter is more useful for what it doesn't say than what it does", and so on.
Having said that, some of the things that help me when I read a letter (for postdocs or faculty hiring)
(Caveat: I'm at a US university and am most experienced in reading letters from US-based researchers, so cultural differences are important)
Who writes the letter
the nature of involvement they have with the applicant: "was a student in my class" is barely adequate, "was my summer intern" is not terrible, "worked with as a colleague" is excellent, "was my Ph.D student" is important, but can also get downweighted.
The level of specificity in the letter: "We worked on problem X and Applicant came up with the key idea and did all the work" is good. "We were stumped on problem Y for ages and Applicant made the breakthrough" is even better. "We all worked on this problem and Applicant contributed ideas to it" is lukewarm.
Points of reference: "You've probably heard of Prof. Awesome who works in this area, and Applicant is awesome-er", or "there are 5 people on the market this year in this area, and Applicant is at least 2nd best".
Things not said, or said in code: "Applicant prefers to work alone" could sometimes mean "Applicant is an obnoxious lout" or "Applicant has no social skills", depending on the context. "Applicant works hard at their presentation skills" could mean "they give lousy talks". And so on. Here again, some prior familiarity with the letter writer helps.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.505541 | 2014-03-29T21:04:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18692",
"authors": [
"JeffE",
"Love Health Money",
"Madan Ivan",
"Shadi Alnamrouti",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11862",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50716",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50717",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50718",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50720",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50722",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"loma",
"user128063",
"user50722"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
196507 | In general, do students like or dislike classes that are taught jointly?
This is a question that I originally posted to matheducators.stackexchange.com but it was suggested that I might get some more answers here.
My department is considering using more than one lecturer (sequentially, not in parallel) to give lectures in our large first-year classes (e.g. 500 students doing engineering mathematics).
In other words, one lecturer does the first 4 weeks, a second does the next 4 weeks and a third does the remaining 4 weeks.
There is enough content of disparate nature (e.g., linear algebra, calculus of various types) to split into three distinct blocks so that each lecturer teaches a coherent block.
Is there evidence, ideally published research studies, about the effectiveness of such an arrangement, and whether the students view it favourably or otherwise.
My inability to locate for myself any research studies may be due to the large number of different meanings of the phrase "team teaching" or "joint teaching" or "co-teaching". Just to clarify, I am not talking about dividing a large class into sections, nor am I talking about two lecturers in the same class. Just the material being divided up and presented in separate blocks by different lecturers.
Given this inability to locate research studies, I am also interested in anecdotal evidence if you have any horror stories or great successes to comment on.
(My suspicion is that the precise details of who the lecturers are, and whether they are good lecturers etc is more important than the distinction between "one lecturer" and "two lecturers", but I'd like to have some evidence one way or another.)
Added in response
Thanks for all the useful responses, which lead me to believe that we can proceed with caution. In what follows, a "unit" is a 12-week class that occupies 1/4 of a student's time, what other countries call a "class" or a "course" or even a "paper" (in NZ).
In our situation, the unit's content is defined by a unit reader that was collectively written when the unit was first designed, and each lecturer would need to cover a specified set of chapters / sections from the reader.
While the contents of each lecture is not specified down to the last page, we know from previous years approximately how much can be covered in each lecture. So different lecturers cannot really deviate much from this if they are to complete the same material in the same time.
The final exam will be written, again with many years of past examples at hand, by the unit coordinator, and marked (mostly) by casual teaching assistants, to a fairly rigid rubric. So the lecturers will not really affect that.
I think https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.05904 is not describing precisely what you want, but might go at least into that direction.
I'm voting to close as opinion based. It seems to me, as you mention yourself, that there are a lot of variables and it's going to depend on the details, including cultural ones. I'd also add the cautionary point that just because the students like something doesn't make it a good idea. I had several lecturers who were (superficially) dull or boring compared to others, but who, in hindsight, provided clear explanations of concepts. I had a couple that were very entertaining but were not good at explaining concepts.
Looks like a perfect opportunity for a poll.
@StephenG In terms of quality of education, it is my experience that students like the dull-but-good instructors better than the entertaining-but-bad ones. On a purely personal level, they may like the entertaining ones more, but when you ask a student whether they ‘like’ a teacher, they will generally assume you mean whether they like them as a teacher and answer accordingly.
@StephenG-HelpUkraine Actually I asked for references to research studies or empirical observations / data from people who have actual experience with joint teaching. Some people have answered with what appears to be their opinion without citing specific evidence, but I didn't ask for that. But in fact, when I look at the front page of this forum, almost every question is a variant of "What should I do in situation X?" whose entire purpose is to canvass opinions from the general forum.
I believe the only general answer is "Yes, in general students like or dislike this."
Do students like or dislike a jointly taught class (singular). 'classes that are taught jointly' sounds like an honors program with two or more required classes, where failing one of them gets you kicked out of the program. If I'm there to learn things then that can be an awesome experience. If it's for credit hours, then [profanity].
I can't point to any research but given that you ask for anecdata:
This approach is fairly common in the UK and related systems. A module (class) may be a single entity for administrative purposes, but in practical terms it may be split into several pieces taught by different people. I have even seen modules where every single lecture is given by a different person.
In general this approach works well. There needs to be one person who has oversight of everything, and who can act as a defined point of contact for student queries that don't fit elsewhere. In the UK this person would likely be known as the 'module convenor'.
The teaching team need to make sure they are all very clear about exactly what is to be covered by each person. If there are any ambiguities about nomenclature, notation, etc, the team should agree their approach. This is probably the biggest source of legitimate student complaints - inconsistencies, holes or duplication between different lecturers. You also need to consider how you're going to handle disruption to your schedule: what happens if - for whatever reason - someone isn't able to cover all their material in their allotted time? Is this going to cause a cascading series of problems for subsequent teaching?
The second issue that can exercise students is assessment: make sure that multiple lecturers does not equate to a (perception of a) greater assessment burden for the students. Note that some students may attempt to play one lecturer off against another ("Oh, but Prof. X told me that I didn't need to do this exam!"). To avoid this, it may be desirable for all 'significant' administrative matters (extensions, dispensations, notification of examination arrangements, etc) to be handled by the module convenor.
A final consideration is the need for synthesis. This will vary between topics, but chopping a class into pieces risks losing sight of the bigger picture - how do they all fit together? Where are the important similarities and differences? Lecturers may require encouragement to think of their segment within the broader context of the class, and not as a stand-alone entity. In some cases it may be appropriate to have one or more lectures at the end of the course that try to draw together all the different threads developed elsewhere.
Edited to add: One significant potential pedagogic benefit of using multiple lecturers is that it can help signpost - and enforce - the division of a topic into distinct logical units. A change of personnel sends a clear visual message that one chapter has finished and a new one has begun. It may also encourage weaker or struggling students to attempt to re-engage: psychologically, at least, it offers an opportunity for a 'fresh start'.
That all sounds sensible-in this case the unit is a list of topics required for engineering students who will only specialise later (into civil, mechanical, electrical etc) and so it can easily be divided into parts that don’t overlap.
(Also in the UK) I've only seen every single lecture given by a different person at Masters or postgrad levels. But splitting a module into clearly-defined sections with different staff is reasonably common. When I've seen this, and especially when I was involved, one academic - often but not necessarily a senior one - had overall responsibility for the course. That included the synthesis material at the (beginning and) end. It was apparently well-received when I had the junior role in such a setup
I see a further problem: exam content and grading. The Convenor, as you call it, should be very clear about what's the scope of the exam, otherwise you may give a false perspective to students on how they will be tested and graded. An anecdote from my old Uni days as a student: the Italian university system had just underwent a reform and new courses were being created. The "old" Electronic Engineering course was split in 3 courses: "new" Electronics Eng., Computer Eng. and Telecom Eng. (5yrs master-level degrees, at the time Italy didn't have a lower level degree corresponding to BSc). ...
... This required some classes content rearrangement and shuffling. The 2nd year "Physics II" exam became a juggernaut class with all the "leftover" modules of other classes. Some modules were taught by different people. We had a 2-week crash-course module on quantum mechanics, covering 1D potential barriers. At the exam one exercise required to solve a 2D problem about a free electron hitting an infinite slab of copper! Ofc. none of the ~100 students could solve it. ...
... Later the person who had "taught" us QM said in front of us with genuine puzzlement "No one could solve the exercise. Funny, it was a simple generalization of the 1D problem we examined in class." and the "Convenor", who was present, was so embarrassed that he couldn't keep a straight face (he seemed like he was about to do a double-palm-face, but he didn't say anything to the lecturer).
I don't have research to point to, but I think we need to make a distinction between introductory topics and specialised topics.
For specialised topics, dividing the lectures can be very much in the interest of the student. During my Master course, we had classes where almost every lecture was given by a guest lecturer who was a world-class researcher and teacher in the speciality. The official course-responsible lecturer would introduce the different lecturers, take care of the exams, and of course make sure that there was a clear thread throughout the lecture series making up the class. It worked great.
For introductory topics, it would seem the division might be there not to benefit the students, but to benefit the teachers (less teaching load). In the best case, benefiting the teachers indirectly benefits the students. But there is a risk that this approach is not beneficial to the students. Maybe we can split up the lectures OK — but someone should take the lead to take overall course responsibility for synthesis, examination, etc. Otherwise one might be better up teaching the class as multiple classes, so students can expect differences.
I had a similarish experience in my past, and I found it that from POV of student, the main point is that all the courses play into each otehr. For example, if you are talking about the Jacobian in Calculus, but haven't covered all the operations one can do with Matrices in the Linear algebra class, then it would be quite awkward.
If the lecture courses play into each other they can be quite good. But, at the same time, there is a chance of overloading the student if they play into each otehr too well, since one would need to do good in one course to do well in others. For this, one remedy would be to give reviews of topics, eg, a topic done in a linear algebra course could repeated back in the calculus course.
Tl;dr: Check for curriculum clash, make sure each course can is complete in some sense, and so on.
I experienced this in my first year physics lecture ("Physics for Engineers"). It didn't feel weird, professor A would present topic X (mechanics, IIRC), then professor B would take over for topic Y (probably optics).
It didn't feel any different to professor A doing the lecture "XYZ 1" one semester, then professor B doing the lecture "XYZ 2" the next semester.
Liking or disliking is usually up to the individual professors and students. A student who doesn't like the way professor A teaches will probably welcome the switch of lecturers halfway through the class, while another student, who likes his style of teaching, will probably be disappointed. E.g. with the physics lecture I mentioned, I would have loved to keep professor A for the rest of the lecture, as he was using the blackboard and the lecture notes were less text and more figures. With professor B, we had lots of text (and formulas) and less figures. The latter was much harder to revise before the exams.
And, as most others have already mentioned, make sure that in exams etc., all parts have the same or at least similar complexity. It's annoying to have different classes with different requirements, but within the same class, it's a big no-no.
Something like this can be highly beneficial for some subjects, but probably neutral or even negative for others. The negative part comes from students needing to adjust to a new lecturer and their teaching / grading style. For some this might not be a problem, for others it can be highly distracting and disruptive to their learning.
Where you can get a lot of benefit is in the social sciences in classes that highly benefit from disparate perspectives. For example, I took a course on Judaism where there was a constant stream of guest lecturers. It worked really well because you got to see interpretations on the subject from highly religious Jews, atheist Jews, Jews highly critical of Israel, ones that were big supporters, etc.
For lower level math courses like LA and calc I would much rather just have one good professor, even if it wasn't their specialty, than to have to adjust to new ones. I would only prefer having a new one come in if the new lecturer was much better at teaching. But the reverse is the worse case scenario. If the new lecturer was much worse than the previous it would be incredibly irritating.
Relatedly to the last point, there's also the issue of dropping. At the start of the course you have the option (at most places for these level of classes) to drop the course or switch sections if you have reason to think the professor isn't going to work for you (hard to understand, etc). But you would have no such option if there's a new one in the middle of the semester.
As a student I once had a math course where they switched professor mid-semester. It was the best thing which ever happened to us because the second professor was able to explain things we’d never understood in an intuitive and clear way. The original professor didn’t even understand our question.
I had my second course on General Relativity taught jointly by two professors and I absolutely hated it. One of the lecturers used handwritten notes and the other provided a pdf with infinite typos in it. It is a frustration not having a complete set of lecture notes taught continuously from start to finish.
That being said, student experience of a joint course/module depends only on who teaches it and not on mode of teaching, provided both lecturers are willing to put efforts into communitaing with one another so the course runs smoothly during transition. As you said the course under consideration is a large first-year class, I would imagine it is of no difference whether it is taught by a single lecturer or 2 to 3 jointly.
This brings me to the second point: my GR course was a small one, and having two lecturers literally mean they get to know you less. But this really is not on the student experience side of things but on recommendation letter issues.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.505853 | 2023-05-22T01:41:08 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/196507",
"authors": [
"Chris H",
"Gordon Royle",
"Janus Bahs Jacquet",
"LorenzoDonati4Ukraine-OnStrike",
"Mazura",
"Michael",
"StephenG - Help Ukraine",
"csstudent1418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10225",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11915",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/135187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36452",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51415",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53810",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57221",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8494",
"keshlam",
"mlk"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
18581 | What happens to equipment purchased using a startup package after an academic leaves the university?
I am on the faculty of a large American university, and I have bought a lot of equipment (laptops, tablets, batteries, etc.) for research purposes using a startup package. I will be leaving for a new university in September, and I am wondering what, in practice, will happen to this equipment. Obviously, it is the property of the university and I'm going to leave it all there, but is someone going to come through with a clipboard and make sure it's all there? Do these kinds of things usually just get sent off to surplus sales? How about the students of mine who will still be at the old university?
How about the students of mine who will still be at the old university? - what's the relevance of this to the question? (Surely you don't categorize your students as "stuff" :))
@ff524, what I meant is that I'd like for my students to be able to use this equipment, even in my absence, for the remaining time that they are at the old university.
What happens to your stuff depends on how your university classifies it. Inventoried material—more expensive items that a university keeps track of—will almost certainly need to be accounted for. So that probably includes laptops and tablets, unless they're so old they've been removed from inventory (as not having any significant value anymore). Major laboratory equipment and furniture also fall into this category. Such materials will probably be held as "surplus," and made available to other groups or departments.
In contrast, small-ticket items—such as stationery and miscellaneous office supplies—are not normally tracked. You won't be asked to reimburse the university for a missing stapler.
In my alma mater, a public university in Spain, all expensive material is inventoried, and as it belongs to a public entity, cannot be sold when used up. Also, to get rid of an old computer (to get an idea: some are using floppy disks) requires a lot of bureaucracy. You need to prove that it is not useful anymore, and blah blah blah.
So, what they do is just drop the material in a given corridor, and wait for it to be stolen. If anyone -ever- comes asking for it, they will just check the corridor "ah, it got stolen". Lots of trees saved.
For other equipment not suitable for this scheme, well, we have a wide terrace with lots of space.
It's always beautiful when pragmatism beats bureacracy :-)
In my old group, what we did was that every lab member could, when (s)he is leaving the group, "buy" their own hardware for a symbolic price if it was older than 3 years (3 years, because after this time span the hardware was considered without significant worth by the university). So basically, everybody usually kept all their equipment after e.g., graduation. Our lab head considered this as sort of his "graduation gift" to the student / ex-lab member - I am not convinced that the entire process was entirely legal, but apparently (as the equipment is formally without worth to the university) nobody ever actually complained (so far). In the rare cases where this was not possible (e.g., a laptop younger than 3 years), we simply kept the equipment back for emergencies (such as when the laptop of one of the lab members breaks and he needs a replacement while it is being repaired).
In my new group, hardware is simply returned, put onto a big pile, and in most cases, forgotten. Every now and then the big pile of old hardware gets thrown away. I am sort of assuming that this is how most universities handle old hardware, as silly / wasteful as it is.
Some universities do hold a surplus sale every now and then for some of the old stuff rather than just tossing it all away (that's what the engineering department at my alma mater does, at least, though they hold the sales very early in the morning and I was never motivated enough to get myself up early enough to check it out).
I invite the IEEE student branch at my school to come by and take anything they can use for parts before we throw out a pile of old hardware (they've done some really cool projects with our old inkjet printers!) And at an industry R&D lab I've interned in, there were large discard boxes in hallways marked "books" "hardware" "cables" that people could pick through.
@ff524 That needs to happen more often. Unfortunately, there are no stakeholders in this: sorting through stuff, cleaning, even carrying it to the foyer is surplus work. :/ (And in Germany, obviously, you can't just give obviously worthless stuff away as long as it's booked to be there.)
@JAB depending on the circumstances, sometimes those surplus sales cost more than they bring in.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.507271 | 2014-03-27T03:45:46 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18581",
"authors": [
"Alex M",
"Bacon Seeds",
"HC111",
"JAB",
"Prateek Gogia",
"Rahul Khanna",
"Raphael",
"RemcoGerlich",
"corsiKa",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11261",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11262",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13509",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1419",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50408",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50409",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50410",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50416",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/50423",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877",
"user13509"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
26053 | Is it normal for a journal submission to show "awaiting assignment" for more than a month?
I submitted a paper more than one month ago. The status of my submission is still "awaiting assignment". May I ask if this is normal? How long have I to wait before formally asking the editor about the status of my submission? My field is mathematics.
It's a little unusual (but not uncommon). Sometimes it takes time to find a referee. It also depends on how busy your editor is. I would wait a few more weeks before enquiring with the journal.
This seems like a duplicate of something. Maybe http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18543/article-awaiting-reviewer-invitation-6-months-after-submission?rq=1 or http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16624/with-editor-status-for-2-months-is-it-normal?rq=1 or http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24162/is-it-okay-to-inquire-about-the-status-of-a-paper-when-the-online-submission-sys/24171#24171
It really depends on the journal. Have you been contacted by the editor upon receipt of your paper? If not, I would contact them immediately just to check up. A month is a long time to go with no word. My paper submissions (all to the Astrophysical Journal) have all been followed up by the editor within a week of initial submission.
There is an acknowledgement of receipt of my submission. However, I think it is computer generated. I did not received any follow-up email from the the editor.
Then it can't hurt to send them an email inquiring.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.507672 | 2014-07-18T00:56:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26053",
"authors": [
"Aakash Gajjar",
"Aryendu Kumar",
"Chandan Kumar Behera",
"James Paul Mason",
"Kasvy",
"Kimball",
"StrongBad",
"charleslu",
"dania qaiser",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11123",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19699",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/216368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69515",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69516",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69517",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69518",
"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
} |
17512 | Have most journals recently stopped providing off-prints to authors?
I've recently obtained my PhD in mathematics and started a post-doc this year. I have 5 published papers, across a wide spectrum of journals (in terms of quality, from very good to mediocre). However I never received any off-prints from the journals and it seems that to receive those one has to pay. On the other hand all the professors that I know of have always a lot of off-prints for most of their journal publications. I always wanted to have these neat looking off-prints but it seems that the winds have changed and journals are becoming "cheaper" (behavior-wise) than ever.
This leads me to the following question:
Is this a recent change? Is it considered the norm now to not send off-prints free of charge?
Are these professors perhaps ordering the off-prints through some departmental fund?
Is there anything that can be done about this situation? Can I pressure the journal into sending me off-prints free of charge (e.g would trying to refuse signing the publishing agreement, unless they provide the off-prints for free work?). Have people tried boycotting journals not offering off-prints? This kind of cheap behavior really strikes me as pushing the boundary of what is acceptable. Not only we do most of the work for the journal (refereeing, writing, etc.) but on top of that journals are expensive and do not even offer off-prints anymore.
Instead of having a pile of such prints on my desk, I now carry what I want to read on a USB flash drive. If I need to, I print out something. I imagine there are applications to render documents into Kindle-like format if you don't want a device throwing photons at you.
My first published paper came with fifty off-prints. I kept one for myself, gave one to my co-author and gave one to a friend in exchange for him offloading one of his off-prints on me. The other forty-seven went in the recycling the next time I moved. If I've been offered off-prints from a journal since then, I've not accepted them.
But if you care for the typesetting (as you write below), can't you just print the electronic version with a good department laserjet printer and staple it together? I'm a PhD student in CS, so I'm barely aware of alternatives. I just wonder whether offprints are better bound, but I wasn't able to Google relevant info.
Off-prints are a remnant from the days when photocopying hadn't been invented and, if you wanted your own copy of a paper, the only reasonable way to get one was to write to the author and ask for an off-print.
Providing off-prints to authors certainly seems to be becoming less common. Some journals still provide them for free, some only for a fee, and some not at all. I don't think most people care, and among those that do care, many prefer not to receive the off-prints. It's been years since I received a request for an off-print, so when I do get them they just end up sitting in piles in my office while I offer them as party favors to anyone who enters the office. Some decline and probably many of the rest recycle them, since electronic copies are far more convenient.
Can I pressure the journal into sending me off-prints free of charge (e.g would trying to refuse signing the publishing agreement, unless they provide the off-prints for free work?).
I wouldn't try pressuring them, which could come across as both eccentric and rude. Instead, you could try begging, by explaining that you are a postdoc with strictly limited funds but would really love off-prints and hope they could provide them at a reduced cost. I have no idea whether this could work, but the worst that can happen is that they'll say no.
Have people tried boycotting journals not offering off-prints?
You are welcome to investigate which journals provide off-prints for free and submit your papers there, but I doubt many people will join you in this.
Thanks for this very nice explanation! As I said in the previous post my affinity to off-prints is purely aesthetic. For example, the type-setting in Crelle's journal is beautiful and I would certainly want to have their off-prints if I published there.
Offprints were a key part of the publication process before the digital era since digital versions did not exist; a smaller number of them commonly included in the page charges. Since journals are now digital and are also moving away from printing as a whole, reprints are things of the past. That your professors get them is most likely because they are used to have it this way but I am sure there will be journals from which they would not be able to get them other than the now standard pdf. I am not sure they get them for free anymore either. A pdf is easy to distribute and carries virtually no cost, to the publisher (journal) or the environment. I am sure the publishers were happy to see them go but the move was not primarily a financial move, it was a lack of demand. Some publishers still provide reprints but since they are no longer part of the standard service, they may charge for them. After all you get a pdf for free to distribute in a similar manner as the reprint. I have been publishing long enough to have a shelf full of useless reprints that in addition exist as pdfs as well. I am also an editor for a journal and for us it is also a question of when, not if, we move away from printing altogether. And in that case the publisher has no part in the decision since we are a society owned journal with no page charges. So I am not sure why you believe the reprint is so important. There is little demand for posting reprints to others when a pdf exists that can be sent over e-mail. I can understand that sending a paper copy can be more personal than e-mailing a pdf but I still think the demand for a printed copies is very low indeed.
Off-prints are not important for me in any practical sense, but I enjoy having a neatly printed copy for myself and to give out to other people... Maybe it's just the younger generation, but I've definitely came across young people (my age) with the same nostalgia for off-prints. Anyway, thanks for this explanation, I think it changed my perception of the matter (I didn't realize there was a lack of demand).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.507950 | 2014-02-27T21:28:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17512",
"authors": [
"Blaisorblade",
"David Richerby",
"Julien",
"Moony Chou",
"Not Quite An Outsider",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10390",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12473",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47274",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47276",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47281",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47282",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47287",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8966",
"offprint_fan",
"tanh",
"toha",
"yousafe007"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
20938 | Is providing a slow response to journal reviews a common/good strategy for minimizing the number of review requests?
It is well known that in mathematics the process of reviewing submitted papers is quite long. There are good reasons for that; intrinsically, reviewing a math paper involves checking and understanding thouroughly the proposed proof, which typically requires a significant time investment. Also, a lot of academics are always very busy and reviewing may not be the most urgent thing they have to do, so it tends to be pushed back.
But it seems that there are other, maybe not so commendable reasons. Apparently, the common wisdom around me is that you should be careful not to turn in your reviews too soon, or you will be flooded with requests by editors (who are all too happy to find someone gullible enough to hurry doing their reviews) and reviews will take up all your time. This is an advice I've often heard given to young researchers, including by people who can honestly not be accused of neglecting the community service aspects of their work. A lot of people I have talked to have a policy of never doing the review before the deadline or the k-th reminder from the editor. I even heard of a person who would do the review almost immediately after accepting it (when time allowed), but only send it after the deadline or later.
In an imperfect world where doing your task sooner than anyone else will mark you as candidate for exploitation, I understand the need for such strategies. But I wanted to check:
Is the risk so big?
Is this practice really generalized (also in other fields than mathematics)?
Do you have alternative strategies to avoid having too many review requests (of course, one can always refuse reviews, but since it can be delicate to do so too often, one may try and avoid requests themselves)?
I don't understand what could be delicate about refusing reviews, especially if the requests come in after you have established a pattern of prompt reviewing. Someone who completed five reviews in two weeks each for a particular editor should be able to decline further reviews for a couple of months without a second thought. What am I missing? (I personally try to review as quickly as I can, simply out of fairness to the authors and the editor.)
Five reviews in two weeks seems unreasonable in my field. Moreover, a given editor knows nothing of the work you did for other editors and therefore has no way of appreciating whether you did your share of reviews lately.
Five reviews in two weeks each. And the OP specifically asks about the situation where you review "too quickly" and subsequently get more review invitations - which implies that the deluge of invitations comes from those editors that previously got your "too fast" reviews.
The question I find myself asking in situation X involving other people's papers: how would I like X if it were my paper? In this situation, how would I like it if reviewers were artificially delaying reviews on my paper just because they don't want to say "no" to future review requests.
"I have already written four reviews for you this year. Please ask someone else."
"Thank you for your interest in my refereeing services. I receive many outstanding referee requests, and can only take on a limited number. I regret to inform you that your request has not been selected for review."
@Kallus, to my ear, your response is so formal it sounds like a joke. "Thank you for your interest in my refereeing services" ... "your request has not been selected for review.". It's just too formal. I agree with JeffE but I would soften it. "Thanks for asking. However I have a full reviewing schedule and I note that I've already done X reviews for your journal this year. Hence I will decline. However, I can recommend asking Y ([email protected]) and Z ([email protected]), who I think will make excellent referees for this paper. Kindest Regards, ___".
@badroit Yes, it was a joke. An archetypical soft rejection letter.
@Kallus, ah okay! I was wondering, lol. :)
I can imagine someone purposefully delaying reviews, but in my experience it's not a widespread or standard part of mathematical practice, and I haven't heard it offered as common advice. I don't think referees have an obligation to inconvenience themselves to finish a review as quickly as they can, but it seems bizarre to deliberately delay when it would have been convenient to complete the review earlier (or, worse yet, when it was already done but not yet sent).
I don't see a real risk here, or a need to avoid review requests. There's nothing wrong with turning them down, and you can use a vague excuse like that you are already busy with other refereeing and don't want to cause unnecessary delays for this submission. In fact, a prompt reply will be appreciated; it already puts you ahead of the people who require reminders to reply to referee requests. (When a referee declines quickly, there's almost no cost, while it's annoying if I send several e-mails over a period of weeks but never hear back.) From my perspective as an editor, I'm not looking for people who will complete a review as quickly as possible. Instead, my ideal referee is someone who is responsive and reliable, who promptly lets me know what they can reasonably do and then does it within the timeframe they estimated. If they do that, they can turn down as many requests as they like.
+1. I'd go beyond "bizarre" to "disrespectful": the author is anxiously waiting for a decision on their paper, and if it's a good paper, the community as a whole wants to see it published, the sooner the better. An intentional delay does a disservice to everyone. The math publishing process is glacial enough without your going out of your way to make it slower.
@NateEldredge: if people post their papers on the arXiv or some other widely available source, then the community can read the papers without having to wait a year or more for the journal to finally publish them. There are also reasons why the community as a whole benefits from a delay in the review process. The explanation is too long for a comment box, see my answer.
I'm honestly puzzled by this tactics. No one will make you write more reviews than you want to. I write my reviews very promptly (at least the editors of the journals I have reviewed for tend to point that out to me when I submit my reviews), but I have a self-imposed threshold for how many reviews I will do within a given amount of time. If I get requests that exceed that threshold, I politely decline and explain why. I don't understand what's so "delicate" about that. It's surely better to be a diligent reviewer who occasionally declines invitations than to be a notoriously late reviewer (on purpose!).
This is a response to the answer by Anonymous Mathematician and the comment to that answer by Nate Eldredge. I just want to point out that there are ways in which the community benefits from there being some lag built into the refereeing process. If there were no such lag then an author would have every incentive to submit every paper to the very best journal in the field, expecting a quick rejection, after which the author can submit to the second-best journal, and so on. In this way, an author could expect his/her papers to wind up in better journals than they otherwise would, since once there are enough low-probability events then there's a good chance that one of them will occur. So it is to the author's benefit to do this, but on the flip side this would cause lots of extra work by the editors and referees of various journals. The main thing I see which discourages authors from doing this is that they don't expect an immediate response from the referees. So that is one reason why it isn't necessarily a bad thing for a reviewer to wait a couple months (say) before sending in his/her review.
That is true, but it's difficult to call it a reason. If that was the case, journals would've do initial sieving were they'd reject some papers without sending them to referees (as done today by Nature, and PRL, for instance). I can see no (good) reason for purposely delaying the process.
Top math journals do initial sieving, but the process isn't so different from refereeing -- the paper is sent to experts who look at the paper to decide whether it can be rejected without in-depth refereeing. This again takes time from experts. Your comment ignores this time.
Does this argument not apply to fields other than math, or are you saying that other fields do suffer from this problem of lots of wasted referee work?
I only know what happens in math. I can't make any comment about what happens in other fields.
@RanG. you can go even further: if this was a real concern, journals wouldn't do any sieving, they'd simply not contact referees for a month or so. And if this was a real concern, all mathematicians would be playing the same game, so the "better journals" comment is highly suspect. This seems like a pretty bogus rationalization of bad behavior.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.508502 | 2014-05-14T13:29:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20938",
"authors": [
"Elizabeth Holdsworth",
"James Gould",
"JeffE",
"Juan Fran",
"Juan Weaver",
"Kallus",
"Michael Zieve",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Prem",
"Ran G.",
"Ri49",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"badroit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12609",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14724",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/324",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57196",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57197",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57217",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57311",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57312",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57409",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57669",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7746",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7976",
"kyle",
"sally",
"sumit sehgal"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
84476 | What is the explicit meaning of “corresponding author”?
Problem
This question was triggered by the comments on this discussion, but comments and answers on these
questions
confirm the existence of conflicting ideas.
There seem to be two prevalent interpretations of the word corresponding author:
The corresponding author is the one who corresponds the (unpublished) paper to the journal, i.e., who performs the technical process of submitting the paper, is available for requests on the review and publishing processes, and so on.
The corresponding author is the one who corresponds on the (published) paper with anybody who likes to do so, e.g., because they found an error or like some clarification.
What I found out so far
Until today, I was only aware of the first interpretation, which was confirmed by my experience: For all papers I submitted, I automatically became the corresponding author and cannot remember that I could choose one of my co-authors for this role. Some of these journals do not even indicate a corresponding author to the reader. Also, there already is a way to indicate that an author is available for questions on the paper (interpretation 2): stating the e-mail address.
On the other hand, other journals do indicate corresponding authorship, which makes little sense for interpretation 1. Also, the value put into this role by some funding agencies for its implied meaning makes more sense for interpretation 2 (not that I completely agree with it).
Looking for some guidelines from publishers covering multiple fields, I found the following instructions on denoting the corresponding author from Elsevier¹, which kind-of covers both interpretations:
Clearly indicate who will handle correspondence at all stages of refereeing and publication, also post-publication.
While there are other questions on this site touching this issue, they focus on consequences of the interpretation, such as
how to assign corresponding authorship,
the implications of corresponding authorship, or
whom to address with a request.
Actual question
What is the explicit meaning of the word corresponding author? Interpretation 1 or 2 as listed above, both, something else, or is this an extreme example of academia’s inhomogeneity and the answer depends on the field or publisher? Please answer only if you have more to offer than personal experience and individual journal guidelines. In particular, please address the possibility of a varying meaning.
¹ which is separate for each journal, but seems to be identical in content for many journals
For what concerns post-publication correspondence, regardless of the corresponding author, in my experience people writes, in order of frequency, to: i) the author they're most familiar with; ii) the first author; iii) all authors.
This discussion on ResearchGate about the possibility to add 2 corresponding authors has some really interesting answers which are relevant for this question, e.g. the comments of Rachel Y Lei and Helmuth Haslacher.
In general, I've seen it several times that the corresponding author didn't submit the paper. Sometimes the corresponding author is even modified after the paper has been accepted. So, I'd conclude: Your 1. definition is the submitting author and your 2. one ist the corresponding author.
To jump to another level: I've seen papers that have been submitted by someone that was not even one of the authors.
@MassimoOrtolano: I know a similar scheme, which goes i) the author(s) the inquirer has had any kind of direct contact to before, and ii) all authors. Based upon my observations in my field, I agree the indicated corresponding author is ignored - the chance that you'll get any response at all is slim enough, so there's no point in further reducing it by writing to only one of the strangers who have written the paper.
It'd be great if the journals would one day distinguish between "guy who handles all the tedious paperwork and stupid online forms" and "guy who takes official responsibility".
IEEE distinguishes between contact author and corresponding author:
Contact Author: This is the person who is contacted in regards to the submission during the peer-review and production processes.
Corresponding Author: This is the person who is listed as the author to be contacted in the printed publication.
PLoS states two types of corresponding authors:
Please note that the corresponding author for the online submission process can be different from the corresponding author of your published manuscript.
Copernicus uses the terms contact author and corresponding author:
From submission to publication, the authors of a manuscript are formally represented by the registered contact author(s). After publication, the authors of a manuscript are formally represented by the corresponding author(s) specified in the published paper.
Personally, I've seen this differentiation several times. Sometimes the corresponding author is simply a role in the journal system that the submitting author/person can assign to one of the authors during the submission process. The corresponding author might also change during the process.
Conclusion:
Some publishers make a difference between the author corresponding with the journal (submitting/contact author) and the author corresponding with potential readers of the article (corresponding author). Some publishers don't. It's absolutely inhomogeneous and seems also to vary by journal not only by publisher. And it varies over time.
Side note:
And yes, these publishers are indexed in SCOPUS and Web of Science (Science Citation Index, Thomson Reuters Master Journal List).
Search for the publishers in SCOPUS (select checkbox "publisher") or the Thomson Reuters Master Journal List (TRMJL). The latter includes all journals indexed in Web of Science. Unfortunately, the search in TRMJL is only based on journals and not on publishers. Search for "plos" to see PLOS journals, "ieee" for IEEE journals and e.g. "geoscientific" to see two Copernicus journals. See also IEEE indexing agreements, Visibility of PLoS and Copernicus metrics.
Great answer. Unfortunately, all sources of your quotes are offline.
I don't think you're going to find anyone who has the final definition for the term. It is not defined by the law or some government regulation, but instead is a term that is used by speakers in the community who may have different interpretations and nuances on their minds when they use it. As a consequence, I suspect that all you can find is how people interpret the term, but you won't get universal consensus. In the current context, it also seems to me that not very much is lost if there is no universal consensus.
To me, and I suspect to most in the community, the "corresponding author" handles both roles: communication throughout the publishing process, and about possible questions. In the past, the corresponding author may also have been the one who has off-prints of the article sitting in his office that a potential reader could request (by mail), but this is no longer happening in times of the internet. Rather, if you have questions, you may contact any of the authors of a paper.
While maybe not a full answer across the fields, in some journals, the papers have a description about what it means.
For example, in IOP papers (a paper of mine where it does happen) it says:
"Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed."
Which, considering the paper has already been published, means the correspondence about any further questions one may have about the research/science on the paper. Note, I did not submit the paper.
However, to give a counter example, IEEE guidelines describe Corresponding author as (sec 6, page 11):
The corresponding author is responsible for submitting the
manuscript and managing it through the review and revision
process with the publisher. The corresponding author makes
sure that all authors are kept apprised of the current status of
the work.
Which could be considered the "submitting author" as in the question linked there.
I guess that the answer is: The definition is not written in stone and different editors/journals use it differently
IEEE distinguishes between contact author and corresponding author.
@FuzzyLeapfrog Interestingly I copied the text from of my answer from the IEEE document, and that contradicts the one you linked. Which probably makes the point stronger: The difference is vague and undefined
Yes, I agree. Overall, more likely it seems to be a journal freature than a publisher feature. @Ander
Royal chemical society definition
`On submission of the manuscript, the corresponding author attests to
the fact that those named as co-authors have agreed to its submission
for publication and accepts the responsibility for having properly
included all (and only) co-authors. If there are more than 10
co-authors on the manuscript then the corresponding author should
provide a statement to specify the contribution of each co-author.
The corresponding author signs a 'licence to publish' on behalf of all
the authors. Any change in authorship after initial submission must be
approved by all authors and justified to the editor.
`Duties of corresponding author, described by Willey
The Corresponding author will receive information about proofing directly from the typesetter. Queries should be directed to the Production Editor.
When the accepted article has been received by Wiley-Blackwell, Author Services will send the corresponding author an e-mail inviting registration in Author Services to track production, and for most journals, for free access to the published article. There may be a short delay from when the editorial office accepts the article and when the alert is sent.Some journals follow a process where all the articles in an issue are sent to the publisher at one time, so the delay for the first few accepted may be several days or weeks. Contact the Production Editor if the delay is more than two weeks.
In page about Defining authorship by Taylor and Francis company
If an article is written by more than one author, you’ll choose one person to be the corresponding author. This person will handle all correspondence about the article and sign the publishing agreement on behalf of all the authors. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all the authors’ contact details are correct. You should all agree on the order in which your names are published in the article, and ensure that your affiliations are correct, as explained below.
Springer describes duties of the corresponding author as
The corresponding author collects the conflict of interest disclosure forms from all authors. In author
collaborations, where formal agreements for representation allow it, it is sufficient for the corresponding
author to sign the disclosure form on behalf of all authors. The corresponding author will include a
summary statement in the text of the manuscript, in a separate section before the reference list, which
reflects what is recorded in the potential conflict of interest disclosure form.
The corresponding author should be prepared to collect documentation of compliance with ethical
standards and send if requested during peer review or after publication.
My university interpretation.
First author is the one who carries out the bulk of the experiments, while having an important contribution to experimental design, data analysis, interpretation and writing of the paper. The corresponding author is in most cases the principal investigator. He has major contribution in the design of the work, he will supervise experiments, he will verify or even contribute to data analysis and most importantly he will take over most of data interpretation and writing of the manuscript. Of course variations to the above scheme may occur.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.509250 | 2017-02-05T03:20:41 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84476",
"authors": [
"Ander Biguri",
"FuzzyLeapfrog",
"Karl",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"O. R. Mapper",
"bers",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16023",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35764",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68222",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73"
],
"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
} |
75318 | Would it be rude to ask a famous professor who doesn't know me personally for a recommendation letter if I have published in a high ranking journal?
Would it be rude to email a famous professor asking for a recommendation letter to Dphil, if I had published in a high or moderately high ranking journal in her/his field and just have letters from foreign unknown professors?
The professor does not know me apart from the published paper. Information about whether the professor knows the paper, or knows me due to the paper, might be edited in later. I was thinking to add my grades (the lowest is an A-), curriculum, and send to professors that work in my subject (it is a very small field). But if it is rude doing this, I don't think it could improve my case.
Does the professor know anything about you apart from the published paper?
If you are in a very small field do not assume your professors are unknown.
Do you have any information as to whether the professor does know your paper? If they have (e.g.) cited it, that makes a lot of difference.
Originally the OP said it is a high ranking journal. Now it says "or moderately high". It is crucial to know if the result/journal is really high ranked.
@Dilworth The very original version (version 1) says "a high or moderately high ranking journal".
Professors outside your school do not have the expertise to write about you as a student; do not send them your grades. But experts in your field do have the expertise to write about you as a researcher.
This question would really be better as, "how can I best approach a famous professor familiar with my work but not known to me personally for a recommendation letter?" rather than the current very bikesheddlike/poll-like question it is.
@enderland: Currently, it is still very unclear whether the famous professor is indeed familiar with the OP's work.
@O.R.Mapper that's a simple detail for the OP to clarify. Right now, this is basically a "yes/no" question, which isn't really a good fit for SE.
@enderland: "that's a simple detail for the OP to clarify" - I fully agree. I, too, am looking forward to that response. "Right now, this is basically a "yes/no" question, which isn't really a good fit for SE." - I disagree, as many valuable questions in here are basically "yes/no" questions ... which come with an implied "and why?".
@O.R.Mapper OP may not know whether the famous professor is familiar with his work. But the only way to find out is to ask. But OP is worried whether asking would be rude, and that's what this question is about.
I wouldn't use the term "rude" but I would say it's (highly) "inappropriate". You're not in a position to ask him for that. There's no basis for the recommendation. However, you could provide the article itself to whoever you want to be recommended to, if you feel that's a strong qualification. Otherwise even if you could get the recommendation it would only be academic "hearsay".
While I don't really like adding answers to questions that have too many already, I also think it's a little hard to cut through the arguing any other way.
It's not rude to ask for a letter of recommendation. Ever. (I mean, if you do it rudely, then yes, but the bare fact of asking isn't). It might be unlikely to succeed, or unrealistic in some cases, but it's not rude.
You should try to ascertain whether this is a normal thing to do in your field. In my field (mathematics), it borders on inconceivable that an undergrad would carry out and publish truly impressive work without an established researcher in the field supervising them and able to write a detailed letter about it. Maybe there are some other fields where that can be the case, though I can't say I know what they would be (perhaps some of the other answerers are). Similarly, JeffE's advice to try to create a dossier of the level that might be appropriate for a faculty position sounds completely preposterous to me, but I suppose it must not be in computer science.
Whenever you ask someone for a letter of recommendation, think about what you are hoping the person will say, and whether they are placed well to say it. So, I would only consider asking for a person to write a letter based purely on having read my research if I knew they were familiar with it, and could place it in a context that is not obvious to the people reading the letter. It can be very valuable to have a letter saying essentially "this paper is actually really important. here is why." I've read such letters, I've written such letters. But the paper has to be really important (in the view of the author) for such a letter to work. I suspect a lot of the argument here is based around whether the answerer really thinks this is an impressive publication or not (which we are all guessing about).
So, if I were you, I would ask some of your professors whether they really think this potential letter writer will be impressed by the publication. If they think maybe yes, then you can email her/him, and say:
Dear Prof. X,
I'm a student at the University of Y and am applying to graduate schools in country Z (or maybe be more specific) in underwater basket weaving, with a focus on the use of hemp. Prof. W thought you might be interested in this publication of mine, since it relates to your work on macramae at the bottom of the Mariana Trench. I was wondering if you thought you could write a strong recommendation for me on the basis of this publication. Thank you very much for your time.
Sincerely,
Joe Schmoe
Asking someone if they think they are able to write a strong letter for you is good way of leaving them an easy out, and not getting a terrible letter since someone finds it easier to write a terrible letter than to say no (it happens). I would almost certainly reject such a request since I really wouldn't feel like I could write a strong letter. But if the publication really is that good, maybe someone will feel like they can.
This is a great answer that also hits two common Academia.SE refrains in one post (Academia varies and talk to your advisor) :)
Yes, very nice answer. The range of (quite passionate!) opinion expressed on this page is a clear indication that your mileage may vary. So, OP needs to find out a) will such a letter help him/her in their particular situation, and b) will the professor be able to write them a strong letter? @BenWebster's suggestions for how to do this are spot on.
Note also the element of "gamble". There clearly (as evidenced here) exist people who would look very favourably on such a letter, and others who would consider it very negatively. So having canvassed opinion, OP needs to decide whether it is worth gambling, or whether they are better off going for a set of "standard" (but hopefully strong) recommendations.
Hmm... I think point #1 is a stretch and likely varies more than what is allowed for by "never, ever." Personally, if someone who knows I had no basis on which to evaluate their work asked me for a letter of recommendation, I'd consider that rude, even if it were someone I knew personally. I would only ask for a recommendation (of any form) from someone who has been closely familiar with my work.
I like very much your letter about hemp on the Mariana Trench!
@reirab What's rude is a personal and cultural judgement, so I can't tell anyone else what to think. My personal feeling is that graduate admissions or hiring are sufficiently competitive, and sufficiently hard to get good information about that if someone I really can't write a letter for asks, I don't blame them for not knowing; I just tell them that I can't. My point was more that rude or not rude is the wrong framing for the question; wise or not wise is a much more important question.
completely preposterous -- Do notice that I said aim for a faculty-level application. I'm proposing a change in attitude--act like a researcher, not like a student--more than a requirement for content. I can count the number of prospective grad students I've ever seen that actually looked like faculty candidates on one hand, but that number is definitely not zero, even if I restrict to mathematicians.
The benefit of recommendation letters is that they give insight into abilities that are not reflected in the rest of your application. Your grades and your publication are already in your application. A professor who doesn't know anything else about you has nothing to write that will help you.
To directly answer your question: it comes across more naïve/inexperienced than rude, but either way I do not see how it will help your case.
P.S. This answer assumes that the professor is not already familiar with your work before your email. To be more specific, I'm imagining you sending unsolicited emails to a bunch of the biggest names in your field (selected purely because they are "famous"), who have not previously heard of you or your work (as far as you know), asking them to write a recommendation letter for you entirely on the basis of your having published a paper in a journal.
If the professor is already familiar with your work (e.g. has cited it, or has had an email correspondence with you about it), then I agree with this answer that his/her letter can potentially be helpful. Similarly, I think Ben Webster offers some useful advice about attempting this in a more nuanced - and potentially more effective - way.
Disagree. I think you missed a crucial point of this question: the OP has published a paper in a high ranking venue. Now, if this venue is really a top place, and the OP thinks that the professor knows about the result, which is supposedly a great result, then the fact that the professor doesn't know personally the OP is a huge advantage. This is the best recommendation that one can get: someone that doesn't know him/her but have heard of his/her result, based solely on its scientific merit!
Strongly disagree; see Dilworth's answer.
@JeffE do you still disagree with this answer if the professor in question is not familiar with the work? Dilworth's answer assumes familiarity with the work, so I'm wondering whether you consider that to be a prerequisite or not.
@Dilworth The OP didn't specify that the professor knows the published paper, just that they don't know him/her in any other way. I added that part based on the exchange in the comments: Q: "Does the professor know anything about you apart from the published paper?" A: "No, I was thinking in add my grades (the lowest is an A-), curriculum, and send to professores that work in my subject (it is a very small field). But if it is rude doing this, I don't think it could improve my case. " See the edit history.
I think that treating the admissions committee like ignorant children is far more likely to harm your application than help it.
@iayork: A researcher is not an "ignorant child" just because they don't know a paper from another field. (In fact, looking at the thousands of papers that each field produces year by year, I would not even dare to consider any researcher an "ignorant child" even for not knowing a given paper that seemingly belongs to their field.)
Let me disagree completely with all the other answers here, that I think have missed a crucial point of your question. In short: I believe it is a reasonable plan to ask for the letter.
Here's why:
The OP has published a paper in a high ranking venue. Now, if this venue is really a top place, and the OP thinks that the professor knows about the result, which is supposedly a great result, then the fact that the professor doesn't know personally the OP is a huge advantage. This is the best recommendation that one can get: someone that doesn't know him/her but have heard of his/her result, based solely on its scientific merit!
P.S. do not add your grades. Ask for a reference based solely on the result, and explain your contribution if you're a coauthor.
This is the correct answer. A standard piece of advice in academia, whenever you apply to anything, aim your application at the next level. Applying for tenure? Aim to present a strong case for full professor. Applying for a job? Aim to present a strong tenure case. Applying for PhD admission? Aim for a strong faculty application. A successful faculty application must have at least one strong letter from a well-known active researcher who is not from the applicant's home department and has not worked with the applicant. A letter like that for graduate admissions is pure gold.
I write letters for my colleagues because I respect them and want to help them succeed, not because there's something in it for me or my institution.
Usually, yes. We talk in the hallways at conferences. We exchenge the occassional email. We read each other's papers. But I have certainly written strong letters for colleagues I've never met, because I was impressed by their work.
I think this answer makes sense if "the OP thinks that the professor knows about the result", but I don't see any indication of that in the question. Perhaps the OP will come back and clarify.
The indication is in the body of the question: "The professor does not know me apart from the published paper." !
@Roland, certainly writing letters for research colleagues you don't personally know, based on their research only, is realistic.
The OP didn't write that the professor knows the published paper. I added that part based on the exchange in the comments: Q: "Does the professor know anything about you apart from the published paper?" A: "No, I was thinking in add my grades (the lowest is an A-), curriculum, and send to professores that work in my subject (it is a very small field). But if it is rude doing this, I don't think it could improve my case. "
@ff524, sorry, but I don't follow you. So why did you add this sentence? Obviously, if the question changes then the answer changes
@Dilworth Important information from comments is supposed to be edited into the body of the text. I did this the best way I could by quoting the OP's comment directly. If you can think of a better way, please edit the question yourself. Hopefully the OP will come back and edit the question themself to clarify
@ff524, I'm still not following you. Where in the comments did the OP says that the professor knows his paper?
Strongly disagree with this answer. If I were asked to write a letter of reference for someone I had never met, based on a publication and their grades, I would not do it and would think less of them for asking. If I were on a committee and received such a letter, I would conclude that if no one the candidate knows personally would give them a positive letter and that their personality must be terrible; it would pretty much destroy their chances. A positive letter from a personal acquaintance, no matter how obscure, would be ten times better than this impersonal letter.
@iayork, you have to get both personal letters AND such letter from someone who doesn't know you based on your work. From experience, these kind of letters are the best.
Someone asked in a comment: "Does the professor know anything about you apart from the published paper?" And the OP said "No". Hence "The professor does not know me apart from the published paper".
@ff524: I agree the current state of the question insinuates the professor does know the paper. It might be best not to edit that bit of information in until there is some clarity as to whether or not the professor does know the paper. (The alternative would be writing something like "The professor does not know me apart from the paper, but whether I know he knows me due to the paper is unknown as of yet (as I have not yet responded to that inquiry)." ... which would be a bit silly.)
@Dilworth In what context and country are you making this claim (a letter from someone who doesn't know you)? If it is true, then it's critical information that's lacking in the question. The only context I'm aware of where that is true in the US and Canada is for tenure committees and I think it is very unlikely that's what the question is about.
Specifically, the question doesn't specify whether the professor previously knew about the work, or whether the professor will "know" about it as a result of the OP emailing to ask for a letter of recommendation.
I don't think it's helpful to conflate tenure or promotion letters and grad school letters. For the former you're trying to establish that you have a national or international reputation, and experts who do not know you are perfect choices. For the latter you're trying to establish potential for success in research, and someone you've interacted with is a better choice. (That said, given the choice of someone better known who knows you but not as well as someone less established, pick the person who people know.)
@ff524, to my knowledge of English, what you added, and what the OP commented is inconsistent, then. I stand by my claim: had the professor known the result, asking for a letter from the professor is a good way to go.
@NoahSnyder, it's not conflating. It's a bonus. If a grad school letter is even stronger than a tenure letter, it just helps you.
@Dilworth I did the best I could, but if you can think of a better way to phrase it while leaving the ambiguity intact, please edit the question yourself to correct it. Or if you believe the question cannot be answered until the OP comes back and clarifies, flag the question to be put on hold as "unclear what you're asking".
@ff524, okay, I see, thanks. I'll leave the question as it is for now.
@ff524: I have taken the liberty to edit the question so it at least does not imply anything that the OP did not state. Hope you (and the OP) are ok with my edit.
@O.R.Mapper it is indeed awkward, but effective. Thanks :)
@NajibIdrissi, I wouldn't say that a professor that heard your talk in a conference already "knows" your result. You should have prior knowledge that professor has heard and hopefully appreciates your result from independent sources. I.e., that your result is "a known result".
"If your result is a "known result" then surely the committee members would know about it, right?". No! It is known to experts in the specific field. Not to all possible scientists out there!
This may be highly dependent on the field, but in my speciality (life sciences) this answer simply doesn’t apply: referees are often phoned and asked specific, “soft” questions about the applicant. The aim of a reference isn’t to assess the scientific merit of the applicant but rather whether they are a good person to work with — in other words: a referee is there to give an assessment specifically about the non-publicly visible qualities of the applicant; something only an acquaintance can give.
@NajibIdrissi Can I now go see all the famous professors in the audience, ask them for a reference letter -- Yes, of course. -- and expect them to comply -- No, of course not!!!
@NajibIdrissi, you certainly have some chance, though not extremely high. Such a letter is almost guaranteed to be valued by committee members.
Such a letter wouldn't help you.
Since the professor doesn't know you, the best possible outcome would be for them to give very generic praise of you. Chances are the admissions committee will swiftly disregard this letter.
If you look into what makes a good recommendation letter, you will find that it's not so much the prestige of the professor, but how closely they worked with you, and whether they give specific examples of your good qualities. Occasionally you might get situations where a famous professor is so famous, that merely their good word is enough to get you in - but this seems to be the exception rather than the rule. It is also very awkward to write a letter for someone you don't know well.
I would think about finding a more suitable recommender. Granted, if you have not only published, but the publication has attracted correspondence from major researchers, this sounds like it would give you a huge advantage over other applicants - and in principle one could write "I don't know this person but I've read their paper, which is very good - here are all the things this person did right in this paper". It still sounds like a stretch to me. Perhaps talk about the paper a lot in your statement of purpose, and hopefully it comes up during the interview.
A letter from someone who doesn't know you, but does know your research, can write about the specific good qualities of your research. That's far more predicitive of your future success as a researcher than most recommendation letters.
Adding on to @ff524's answer, most professors tend to only write recommendations if they know the candidate for some time or worked/researched with them for a certain minimum period of time. There are also very few institutions who may require LoR's from people whom you are known to for at least X amount of time. Even if not, an LoR which is just a repeat of the résumé may not so serve your purpose.
I disagree somewhat: When applying for research postdocs (at least in my field) it is not uncommon (in fact encouraged) to get LoRs from professors outside your department. This will be professors who are familiar with your work but may not necessarily know you personally. They are writing about the quality of your research and putting it in context for the admissions committee, most of whose members will not likely be familiar with your specific research area.
However, here we are speaking of a PhD applicant rather than a postdoc applicant. Such LoRs (where the letter writer does not know the applicant personally) are more unusual, but I think this is mostly a function of the fact that often PhD applicants often don't have significant publications. But I would suggest that if a PhD applicant did have a good publication, then a professor with research interests in the same specific area may be willing to write an LoR, and such a letter would be helpful to the applicant.
I agree with Dilworth and JeffE: letters of recommendation from people who just know you via your reputation "is pure gold" (@JeffE).
A friend of mine is applying for an O-1 visa. Apart from papers and citations, press coverage etc, a crucial part of the application is 7 - 10 letters of recommendation.
Her employer is hiring a lawyer to help her on the process. Here is their suggestion to have a strong application: 3 letters from academic colleagues (including PhD advisor etc), 3 letters from industry, and 2 letters from people who just knows her via reputation (papers etc).
Applying for an O-1 visa is not the same as applying for a PhD (but a lot more difficult IMHO), but I think the way profiles are evaluated is similar. And I believe the lawyer know what they are doing.
On one hand, I wouldn't "ask a famous professor who doesn't know me personally for a recommendation letter." On the other hand, your idea of asking a famous professor in your field to endorse you, based on your work in a high ranking journal, is a very good one.
The "bridge" solution is to get to know the famous professor personally. Since you have published in the same field as him, there must be plenty of people that you know that he also knows. (The editors of the journal for starters.) Find out which of your acquaintances is in this category and ask at least one of them for a personal introduction, or at least a letter/email of introduction. If all else fails, you might manufacture your own introduction by emailing him on his work in your common field, and perhaps asking him to comment on yours.
The likelihood is that you will get a good letter of recommendation. But the tactics in the above paragraph were to "take the temperature." There's a small chance that he disagrees with your approach or (less likely) sees you as a threat. You want to guard against that small chance of getting an unsuitable recommender.
A recommendation is about a person. A review is about a piece of work. Such a professor may review your work, but he is in no position to give a recommendation, since he does not KNOW YOU. I would not give a recommendation to someone I did not know, and in fact, would probably write back telling such a person that his request is not appropriate, exactly for this reason.
A recommendation is about a person. A review is about a piece of work. — And researchers are judged on their work.
Keep in mind that the "famous professor" is bound to be very busy. There's no exception to that rule. If you're Ramanujan writing to Hardy, or Bose writing to Einstein, then you're making it worth his while. Otherwise, what's in it for the Prof? Warm fuzzy feelings? Notice that the OP is not suggesting, for example, a collaboration. That might be worth something to the professor. And it could be the basis of a strong letter of recommendation later.
No
If I was part of the admissions board, and received a letter of recommendation saying essentially "I don't know them personally, but this paper they wrote is great", this is what I would be thinking:
You are applying to a place where you believe no-one is capable of evaluating your paper on its own merits, so you need to get someone else to look at it and explain its quality to them. In that case, why are you even applying? It's clear that there is nothing you can learn from them. After all, if they are not even competent enough to evaluate your previous paper, how are they going to be able to evaluate any future work?
I wouldn't dismiss you out of hand for it, but it would definitely count strongly against you - someone who thinks they already know more than the professor is not someone I would want to be teaching, and is almost certainly going to be causing problems throughout their course - potentially even legal trouble, if they start making accusations of discrimination when the professors give them anything less than full marks.
If you think your paper is very good, and should be considered, then include it with your application. Otherwise the best case you could hope for is being damned by faint praise; the worst is something like I describe above.
This argument doesn't make much sense to me. It is certainly plausible that there are faculty in the department who are in the same subfield as the OP and would be able to evaluate the work, but happen to not be on the admissions committee. "The paper they wrote is great" is not helpful, but "The paper has revolutionized subfield X" certainly is, and it's plausible that the admissions committee wouldn't know that if they're not in subfield X.
I would expect that the faculty doing the evaluation would be (or would be able to consult with) the faculty involved with that specific programme. Otherwise, how could they properly evaluate the applicant? Unless their academic ability is not being evaluated, in which case I would expect the recommendation to not count for anything.
Well, a letter about the impact of the research might get them to consult with faculty not on the committee :) Given the large number of applicants to prestigious programs and the ease with which applications that are not obviously outstanding can be filtered out, it can be helpful to have something in the application to suggest to the committee that they do that.
@ff524 But why would you need to refer to a third party? Surely the reviewing committee is capable of recognizing the name of prestigious journals in their field. OP can just include in their CV "I had an article published in Nature" (or wherever), and that should be enough to get their attention. I the paper they wrote really is a big deal, then the faculty should be able to recognize that for themselves, otherwise why would you want to learn from them?
Some papers and journals are widely known throughout the broad field they are in. Some are very well known and highly regarded in their specific subfield, but not nearly as much outside of that.
The point to a letter of recommendation is that it is a recommendation. If they don't know you, then what is their basis for recommending you? If they're straightforward and honest, they can't. Therefore, the request is basically asking someone to lie. Yes, that is rude.
Hence, I favor the first sentence of Ébe Isaac's answer.
You might want to quote or paraphrase the current first sentence of Ébe Isaac's answer, in case it is ever modified or removed.
@JW : A sensible idea. The reason I'm declining to make the change is that I'm intentionally pointing people to Ébe Isaac's, where they are more likely to check out his entire answer and give him the up-vote he deserves. It's not my goal to steal his thunder by copying the info. His original sentence should remain in history if his answer is edited. So, until I notice it changed, I'll be nice to Ébe and keep sending people that-a-way. All that said, though, you are right, and I do appreciate your kindness by pointing out the idea.
Certainly couldn't recommend someone for admission to a PhD program based on the quality of their published research, even if you didn't know them personally? On the other hand, I might know a lot of professors personally, but most of them may have no idea about my research work.
If they don't know you, then what is their basis for recommending you? -- Your work.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.510354 | 2016-08-17T03:46:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/75318",
"authors": [
"Aman Kurkura",
"Amin Modarres Zadeh",
"Ben Carew",
"Ben Webster",
"Benubird",
"Cristina Savin",
"Danica Concepcion",
"Dilworth",
"Emili Palacios Beristain STUDE",
"Hack-R",
"J W",
"Jacob W",
"JeffE",
"Joe Corneli",
"John M",
"Klaus Draeger",
"Konrad Rudolph",
"Mad Jack",
"Mohammed Misbahuddin",
"Muskaan Pandey",
"Noah Snyder",
"Nobody",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Patricia Shanahan",
"Peter Kämpf",
"Plamen Atanasov",
"Rama",
"Saka Sulymon",
"Sam",
"Sasha Dall",
"Sezen Bal",
"TOOGAM",
"Yiwei Chen",
"as m",
"enderland",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10220",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12339",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12999",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16159",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211105",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211106",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211107",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211108",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211109",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211110",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211111",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211152",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211164",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211171",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211175",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211177",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211178",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211191",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211196",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211252",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211377",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/211741",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26671",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30772",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32387",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32510",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36243",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46184",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56297",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5845",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8760",
"iayork",
"jenny li",
"mk90com",
"reirab",
"school yemen",
"user2390246"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
175796 | How long can a pure math(Algebraic Number theory) PhD holder can work as a Post Doc/research associate in their career?
This is rather a curious question based on future career after PhD, looking at the crisis in academic/teaching job market.
If one completes PhD with pure mathematics (Algebraic Number Theory) with few good(not excellent) publications and to some extent good background (not excellent). Assume they are not ga enius but they are hard working. Assume they are searching for a permanent job in college/university teaching but is suffering while there are options to work as post-doc/research associates for them.
The question:
Exclude the possibility of getting a permanent teaching job. Can one prefer to work as a post-doctoral/research associate throughout ones whole (at least upto 40 years) career including several institutions and in any country ?
or, simply
How long can a researcher remain as a post-doctoral/research associate in several institutions and several countries, in algebraic number theory, in their career ?
If you are more than 6 years past your degree, I can’t hire you as a postdoc. But that is just one institution. Perhaps you should look to research labs or industry rather than academia.
I think that the differences between different countries or even institutions are really large in this context. Do you want to specify a locale?
@Christian, I didn't get you. But I meant I am ready to work any country not just my home country. For example, after working 1/2 years in some institution, I can go to any country for new appointment as post-doc/research associate. My question is-how long can one continue such process ? For example, the comment of Jon Custer says, he won't take anyone if one got PhD 6 years ago.
@JonCuster, thanks for your nice comment
@MAS I know of institutions which do not have such requirements but might not be able to give you a temporary contract more than once. Some countries like Germany have an overall time limit for temporary positions. So, I do not think that it is possible to give a reasonable answer which goes beyond "it depends".
@Christian, thanks for your comment
@DanRomik, I think astronomy and pure mathematics has a difference in the sense that one can work on astromy in many physics/engineering laboratory. In pure mathematics there is less possibility in that way
but is suffering --- Depending on what this means (financial suffering? current department/university politics suffering? current academic bullying suffering? current living location too hot, too cold, too dangerous, etc.?), being more specific might help with replies being more relevant to your personal situation.
@DanRomik, yes thanks
@DaveLRenfro, I think it is clear and obvious because i have used the term "job crisis in market"
@MAS I'm not sure that there is really a "crisis" in the academic job market; "crisis" implies something restricted to some moment in time. Rather, there are simply fewer long-term academic jobs than there are people trained with a PhD. This isn't particularly new, and is certainly not new since the time you started your PhD.
@MAS " For example, the comment of Jon Custer says, he won't take anyone if one got PhD 6 years ago" You are misinterpreting the "can't". The institution will not allow him to hire anyone 6 years past his PhD. Each instiutions will have different rules.
@MAS "one can work on astronomy in many physics/engineering laboratory" Absolutely not, there are way less astronomy position than pure mathematics, and physics/engineering laboratories are hiring (sometimes) physics and engineers. But they also have to spend a lot of money on machineries/tools/computers. Actually, you are more likely to work in those labs, rather than an astronom (keep in mind, you still have very low chances, but relatively higher than an astronom)
@BryanKrause, sorry, but I don't agree at all. How can someone who is established understand the difficulties faced by early career stragglers ? In my country we say "unemployment crisis" when the vacancies comes out is very less with respect to number of applicants every time. Due to Pandemic, the situation has come to at more severe situation. New recruitment advertisement has been very less
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.512712 | 2021-09-22T14:15:07 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/175796",
"authors": [
"Bryan Krause",
"Christian",
"Dave L Renfro",
"EarlGrey",
"Jon Custer",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128758",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/151712",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45543",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49593",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"learner"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
191462 | Is it illegal to use resources in a university lab to prove a concept could work (to ultimately use to create a startup)?
While I understand this is not a legal help site and it may differ from university to university, I am curious if anyone has any thoughts on this.
I am in an undergraduate programme in a life sciences-related field. My friend and I have an idea for a genetically modified organism product that we would like to bring to market.
We plan to make the full product elsewhere, but we need a proof of concept which we could easily create in the lab we both work in, just using leftover chemicals/DNA that would be disposed of if not for us using it. We simply want to create one organism to prove it could work, so we can then get evidence and support to complete the project elsewhere.
However would there be legal ramifications for just making the proof of concept in this lab?
Are you fine with the university claiming intellectual property rights?
And if you're going to ask about the law, you'll have to name a jurisdiction.
Universities usually claim patent rights on things created there. There is also the issue of safety, not just of law.
This would be in Illinois. The product would not be patentable, as due to the nature of source DNA the patent would belong to an outside lab however we would have permission for its use.
What Buffy is saying is that if you create a GMO with university resources, likely the university could claim to own the GMO.
You probably need approval from higher up in the university to try anything using DNA.
If I understand the legal terms correctly I believe in this case the GMO would automatically be owned by the outside lab that had produced the plasmid.
Ask the person in charge of the lab.
I have done a bit of pro bono work for a friend's startup, and when they were getting acquired, as a part of the due diligence they had to circle anyone who had contributed in any way, and have them sign an agreement where they give away or sell their contribution.
Illegal... It's unlikely (except perhaps if you could be accused of stealing the chemicals)... Against university policy and quite likely to get you sacked... Absolutely. You probably also would have a hard time asserting you actually owned the resulting IP.
Long and short of it, don't do this without at least asking.
All the comments about IRBs and patent claims and so on are, in my opinion, irrelevant. The issue is very simple: The lab and the equipment in it belong to the University. Doing anything in the lab without asking the University's permission is potentially tortious. And this is a good rule to follow in general: don't use other people's stuff without asking them first.
That's not how patents work, it doesn't matter who owns (/discovered/...?) the dna. Only relevant question is who invented the product and possibly who that inventor(s) needs to assign the patent to for contractual reasons.
I would offer a more general guideline: if you are using someone else's resources in any capacity whatsoever, it is only prudent to negotiate in advance what happens to the products of your work.
This applies not only to startups, but also to publishing results of your previous work without giving any measurable return on investment (affiliations, co-authorships) to the lab you performed it in.
It is exceedingly rare for the work to be blocked altogether, because then no one wins, everyone loses. The crucial detail here is both sides explicitly agreeing that the deal is fair. It need not be purely monetary, either, but IP has value.
Look at it from a managerial perspective: you take in taxpayer dollars and produce something of value to the taxpayers. Overseeing agencies like to see funding statements on all the things the lab has produced, and they are often fairly specific. As a manager, I get a pat on the back for the lab being efficient, and am generally interested in you doing cool things with the equipment which taxpayers could perceive as a good use of their money. If you do not provide me with grounds to say "hey taxpayers, we did this, is this not great?", then for all I care, you just took the money and ran off. Not great. There is another caveat, too - like BillOnne points out, if something unethical or substandard happens on my watch, I am liable for that and very much not happy about it!
All in all, you should do everything completely above the table, and it may mean jumping through more hoops than otherwise. But these hoops are in place for a good reason.
Indeed, you face a risk of investors clawing back a lot of your hard-earned money, but "either you get a little, or no one gets anything" is not too bad of a negotiating position. There are, indeed, businesses which became successful because of appropriating something valuable at the start, but doing so sneakily is certainly not the way to go.
I agree strongly with this answer, not least because this may vary widely according to circumstances: What country, what research outputs, what discipline, what lab in a given university, maybe even what piece of equipment depending on how the equipment was funded. (I am sure I am not the only person who has overheard enterprising young undergrads and grad students suggesting bitcoin mining operations thinly disguised as 'research projects' using federally funded equipment....)
Apart from the legality of who owns the product, and the issue of using the resources and equipment without permission, there are other considerations.
You would be doing biological research. You give very little detail other than potentially a novel GMO is involved.
Usually such things have at least a minimal review for ethics and safety before they start. Possibly it would be fairly trivial, depending on what actions you were considering. But there are MANY bilogical processes that the university would be maximally upset to find out you had done without the review in advance. And in the most extreme cases, they could be induced to come after you with legal consequences.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
You would need to negotiate an intellectual property agreement with the university's technology transfer office (and other interested parties). Regardless of legal necessity, if you want investors to put money into your business, you should have that agreement available for the investor to examine.
The technology transfer office is not there to get money from you right now. They want your business succeed, which makes them look good and maybe gets them a much more substantial amount of money in the distant future. They probably know who would like to invest in your business.
State universities in the US have a mandate to support and foster the local economy by developing research and technologies that can be economically exploited. If you have a good idea, the university might be quite open to it.
However, you need to go through the proper channels in order to use university resources. First step would be to talk to the supervisor of the laboratory, who would also be more familiar about the procedures that need to be followed. You might also want to write up your idea beforehand in as much detail as you can muster and have someone else sign each page, as it is not unheard of for discussion about priorities etc. to ensue later.
This is not a legal help site, and the only correct answer is to find a competent IP lawyer in your jurisdiction to review your contract with your university. It is very possible that using university resources to create new IP would result in you losing some or all of your IP rights, so this is not something you want to take lightly if you ever hoped to start a business or sell your idea. Even just having doubts about the legal ownership of your IP could be enough to make it effectively worthless.
This is not a direct answer to your question, but apropos this topic, you might be interested to note that Noam Chomsky has written a lot about how various industries have used the university system as a source of tax-funded research whose products they then privatise for their own firms (for a gentle introduction, see one of his talks on this topic). This is particularly common in military research but it also occurs in technological fields across many industries. So, the cynic in me says: the legality of this practice depends on your ability to use the political system to do it at scale.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.513441 | 2022-12-11T00:03:07 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/191462",
"authors": [
"Anonymous",
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"Bryan Krause",
"Buffy",
"Dawn",
"DonQuiKong",
"Elin",
"Franc Lort",
"GEdgar",
"Mark Dominus",
"ScottishTapWater",
"Tomáš Kafka",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10344",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/165638",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28786",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32512",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72211",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/93511"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
194228 | My Korean professor and Korean lab members threaten me to give my research to them. Please advise me
I obtained my research degree under rather abusive circumstances from a Korean university. My research work involved a data set from a company. During my studies, I presented my work at a conference as the main author. I won the best paper award. Under pressure, I handed over the tools I developed and the data set to another student in the group.
I have now been invited to submit an article to a special issue dedicated to this conference. My (former) professor is threatening me to name that other student as first author, otherwise they will submit the article without me.
What should I do?
Is this a PhD thesis you are talking about? I am unfamiliar with Korean academia, but from what it sounds like - if you already received your degree from the university - it might be the best to leave this xenophobic mess behind you and move on.
Although this situation may have to do with the specific country, I wonder whether it's appropriate to focus that much on nationality and (potentially) xenophobia. Even if we suspect that it has something to do with Korean university culture, couldn't the same thing happen to a Korean student/assistant as well? And could useful answers not be given by people experienced with similar situations in other countries?
I read a lot of abuse in this question, but not a specific question anyone can answer. You apparently got your degree, so at least you have that. For the interpersonal conflicts, my suggestion is to talk to the department head or a grievance office in the university. I would suggest to think about what specifically you want to have addressed, because that is not clear to me from the post.
@FarahJabeen I've rewritten your question, focusing on those details that seem relevant to the publication dispute to me. You can roll back my edit if you disagree.
@ChristianHennig I mostly agree with you, but I've left information that this happened in Korea in regardless when editing. There might be some useful culture-dependent advice in how to navigate the social dynamics of this.
While overall it seems prudent to minimize any future inactions with these people, getting this paper might be worth it to engage a little bit longer. You have your degree, and thereby the power of your former professor over you is significantly diminished.
For this publication, there are two independent things to do before interaction with them further.
One, make sure that you have all the relevant document of your work on the project in safe spot. You don't want to find that your draft on the university's SVN is suddenly gone without a trace, something like that. With the conference presentation already out there, you are in a very good spot anyway.
Two, make a rough tally of what work still needs to be done for the article, and who could do that. If there is a lot more work to do, then letting the other student do it in exchange for first authorship might be a better course of action than fighting for it and doing it yourself. In the rest of my answer, I assume that her earning it isn't a feasible option.
Having done those two things, you calmly point out to the professor and other student that you have ample evidence of your crucial contributions to the project, and that any attempt of them to submit the paper without you will end up with you pointing this out to the relevant editors, which will then look very, very bad for them. Instead, provide a simple plan involving limited interaction for how this paper is going to come to be, if at all.
One important question is whether the professor and/or the other student themselves can make a decent claim to authorship rights. The answer is probably yes for at least the professor, and that means that just as they cannot publish without your approval, you can't publish without them either. Do consider whether you are prepared to walk away without the paper happening.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.514203 | 2023-03-13T06:58:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/194228",
"authors": [
"Arno",
"Christian Hennig",
"Sursula",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110247",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12047",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/133549",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
15394 | Open Access Crowd Based Publications (StackExchange like)
I am a PhD student in computer science and sometime in the (more or less) near future I have to publish my results. Yet, I am rather sceptic about the current state of publishing, aka peer-reviewed journals, especially when they are not open access. I have published before on Elsevier and honestly I am not sure whether I should do this again. I have political concerns as well as concerns about the quality of the peer-review process.
I wonder what "new ways" are out there for publications?
I am a big fan of StackExchange (especially StackOverflow :-) ), so I am asking if there exists a very similar forum for scientific publications?
Accordingly, a publication happens in form of forum post like this one. Instead of anonymous peer-review, every member of the forum can comment and rate the publication. Is there something like this out there? Thanks a lot!
Edit: Great that someone had the idea a year ago :-) (Towards a Stackexchange-like comment/reputation system for research papers)
Have been there any attempts to create such a system since then?
If you haven't already, you should check out Peerage of Science for an alternative way to do peer review. Still made pre-publication, but meant to be open, journal independent, and with reviews of reviews. This is not dealing with "crowd-based" publishing though.
The usual way to deal with outdated questions and answers is to post a bounty on the outdated question and not create a new question. Obviously you don't have enough rep to post a bounty, but if you leave a comment on the original question, I would be happy to post the bounty on your behalf.
Ok, thanks. Yet, I am also required to have 50 reputation for comments on the original question. So, I cannot even request a bounty from someone else there :-D
Instead of anonymous peer-review, every member of the forum can comment and rate the publication. Is there something like this out there?
Yes. The forum is called "the academic community," the comments are called "what they say about your paper in their paper," and the ratings are called "citations." They are not anonymous. Actually, citations alone are misleading, since they can be negative as well as positive. The real way to determine if your idea is good is to see if people use it to build new, interesting ideas / explanations / products / companies / whatever. (I think they call that "impact?")
In other words: publishing is the easy part (these days). Getting people to say good things about your research is the real challenge.
I do think you are wise to think about publishing in open-access journals—and not for some self-righteous political/philosophical reason. The real reason for making your paper freely available is: more people will read it! Plenty of interesting people in the world live behind the Great Paywall of Academia.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.514549 | 2014-01-05T19:16:34 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15394",
"authors": [
"SmCaterpillar",
"StrongBad",
"fileunderwater",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10502",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7223",
"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
} |
43303 | Referencing: Which one is more ideal? (cite as from cited or direct cite)?
Well, while carrying out a review of literature for drafting a proposal I found like these in some of previous works (reports).
Some benefits of the “certain thing” on xyz are abc( person1, date) , cde( person2, date), fgh( person3, date) , ijk( person4, date)
and
Some of the more researches in the field include ( person1, date; person2, date; person3, date; person4, date).
Now If I have to include and cite those in my report, which one is better idea? Also, please notice the nature of contents being cited(benefits and previous works).
Option 1: Cite as “as cited in report X” which I read and have only one reference of that report
(pros: less references)
Option 2: Go to each report, study and include each one(cited) as separate citation in my report
(pros: may be, will look more detail investigations. But is it required in cases like this one?)
Which one should be more ideal?
So, what should I do? Any suggestions?
Please note that you are probably mixing two issues here. One question (the one you seem to be asking) is: Should the content of referenced works be briefly alluded to (if only by a single keyword)? The other question (that you are not asking, but that could be asked, given that your two samples choose different paths) is: Should references be used as annotations that could be deleted without syntactically breaking the sentence (1st sample), or should references be used like words (2nd sample)? (If I recall correctly, the 2nd question has been dealt with before here on Academia SE, and ...
... in order to ask the first question without touching upon the 2nd one, I suggest swapping your 2nd sample with something like "There has been more related research in the field (person1, date; person2, date; person3, date; person4, date).")
Option 1 is lazy and does not give credit where credit is due. I'm not sure what the proposal is for but it irks me when people constantly cite reviews instead of the original sources. You should choose option 2 not because it makes you 'look good' but because those studies should be acknowledged.
@user49483: Apparently, I am interpreting the question completely differently from you, as it seems to me that in both options, the very same (amount of) credit is given for each of the four cited works. The only difference is that in option 1, the content of each publication is briefly addressed, whereas in option 2, there is just a superficial remark that the four works are somehow related, and they are listed without any further comment (so readers will have to go to each report to find out what it is about). OP, could you please clarify your question?
@O.R.Mapper I was interpreting the quoted bits as examples of reports/reviews that contain information the OP needs to acknowledge in the proposal rather than examples of how to cite multiple works. OP then seems to be asking whether to cite a review not the original sources (option 1) or cite the original sources (option 2). But it is confusing and I might be wrong.
Exactly as mentioned by Mapper,I think it’s just making things concise than not crediting.We point to X which points at a,b,c,d. Moreover, citing the cited work includes “as cited in” which tells the report is not original author or report has just cited(from somebody else, which will be listed in his ref).Suppose literally there is a line; The benefits of computer are speed (ref 1), accuracy (ref 2), storage (ref 3). If I simply want to tell,some benefits of computer are speed, accuracy, storage, [report x] and put 1 in reference with keyword “as cited in..” than 4 refs then is it really bad?
Same with Previous works, I am not discussing what has been discussed in each of the previous works but just mentioning as information that x, y, z, a, b, c were researches on this topic as well. Again, it will be cited as content cited somewhere(as cited in...). If I were interpreting then it would have made sense to include each as principal references. Only problem I see in it is it will show as if you are bit lazy(but my question is is it required in case of previous studies,benefits) Even there are many tutorials on it http://www.noodletools.com/helpdesk/kb/index.php?action=article&id=152
Sorry.My comments were so packed that even i could not talk for your replies.Thank you for the replies.
The value of a review is the way in which it gathers and synthesizes prior work to form a more complete picture of the field. How you should cite things you learned about through the review depends on whether they are being used as examples of that broader picture or unique elements.
If the work is an example of the broader picture, which it sounds like it is from what you have written, then you need to credit both the review and the individual examples, e.g.:
Other research in this area is thoroughly reviewed in [REVIEW], of which the most relevant to this discussion are [X], [Y], and [Z], because of reasons.
On the other hand, if you really just want to talk about paper X, and the only value of the review to the discussion is that it's where you first stumbled across X, then you only need to cite paper X.
In both cases, however, you need to actually make yourself familiar with the work that you cite, not just take somebody else's word for it, since the review may well have misinterpreted the work or presented a slanted picture since the author had an axe to grind on the subject.
Yes, got it. Thanks. Makes lot of sense. As an analysis of previous works, I read more than 15 reports in detail and included 10 of them in the proposal analyzing & presenting their findings and limitations (paragraph for each). But there are some more researches listing in a report, which I was trying to include as “In addition as mentioned in report x following researches …….[10 researches] are also carried out in topic”. But, may be better idea will be to study (check) each one and put very relevant ones only and put a direct reference. Thank you.
Like user49483 said in the comment, citing a review is considered very bad form. Basically, it is your job to read a lot (reading widely) and cite what is appropriate.
As one who marks papers, I definitely reduce students' scores for citing indirectly like this (and I see it all the time).
When you cite indirectly, you are saying "I know this is important because I am citing it but I did not read this important piece." JeffE said in a comment (which I cannot find) that not citing the original is actually you saying that you could NOT FIND it because if you CAN find it you MUST read and cite it (or something to that effect).
One of the many reasons to read and cite the original is because the third party (reviewer) might be reporting on the original work incorrectly. I saw this one time when someone said a famous author in my field had said something which did not sound like that author at all. So, I re-read the writing which was referenced and it was simply being mis-reported. If a reviewer mis-reports and you cite the review then you are showing that you do not have the proper understanding (and your grade should reflect that lack of understanding).
Is it more work to cite properly? Of course it is. Doing anything properly takes more time but we do it because it is the proper way and taking shortcuts simply leads to poor results in any field or study or work.
Thank you very much. Yes, it makes sense. But I was just curious to know on those specific cases such as literally just listing previous works or benefits. So if report x says: (report1,date), (r2,date1), (r3,date1), (r4,date1) were some researches on in topic then if I have to mention same thing as info in my report then I can say: some of the researches on this were (report1,date), (r2,date1), (r3,date1), (r4,date1) and list 4 original refs in my report?(legally put or forget about where I found it as it's not his work). Will it be plagiarism or not? I am really confused and curious.
@user2700108 I don't really understand your question clearly so my answer might be off. Normally, I would expect someone to write about what those authors did. Just to say they "researched on this topic" is not very useful. If you did not read the original work, you should not cite the original work. If you want to read the review and cite the original, that is not the right way, an indirect citation is better than an inaccurate citation (the citation says you actually read the piece you are citing). If my answer does not fit your question, please clarify the question.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.514822 | 2015-04-10T09:25:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43303",
"authors": [
"Gustavo Zomer",
"Noah Caplinger",
"O. R. Mapper",
"TheGooooogle",
"XYTMR",
"earthling",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117374",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117375",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117376",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117380",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117437",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15389",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30768",
"rbnak",
"user117376",
"user49483"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
63866 | How to cite a paper whose place and status of publication is questionable or unknown
I want to cite the following paper:
Cem Kaner & Walter P. Bond, “Software engineering metrics: What do they measure and how do we know?” 10th International Software Metrics Symposium (Metrics 2004), Chicago, IL, September 14-16, 2004.
Most of my citations of papers in proceedings contain page numbers.
The PDF file does contain page numbers from 1 to 12. However, I cannot find any contribution from the author in the table of contents for the proceedings. Other citations cite the paper without page numbers.
What should my citation look like? And in case I encounter something like this in the future: what explains the apparent mismatch between the author's website and official proceedings?
I have changed the title to address the actual issue. The previous title, Finding page numbers for citation, made me expect quite a different question. Only after reading the question text, it became clear that the question is not actually asking about the page numbers as such, but the lack of reliable page numbers are only a symptom for the underlying problem at hand, that a paper does not appear to have been published in the venue that it claims to be from.
I have double checked in IEEE Xplore. The paper does not appear in the table of contents, the authors do not appear in the author list. Additionnaly, I cannot trace it in ISI Web of Science (which mentioned other conference papers by C. Kaner in 2004).
There are three options (in general):
A mistake in the proceedings for a regularly accepted paper,
The paper is more a tutorial, a keynote, a late breaking paper that has not been through the standard review process,
A paper that was not published in the conference, and which was put online carelessly in the conference paper shape.
As I am really unsure, and know that papers sometimes cite papers they have not read (and papers that do not exist), I would cite it only as an online document, or a preprint, with the url, without page number, and a potential note like "(often refered to as published in Metrics 2004)".
Most of all, I would suggest you not to cite it, unless it is really useful for your work. Or cite a paper really "published " by the authors instead (good luck with that).
EDIT: after a long search, I have found using the Wayback Machine that this paper could have been part of Metrics 2004 Late Breaking Papers:
The purpose of the late breaking papers session is to give authors the
opportunity to present work from on-going projects, new ideas and
papers not complete at the time of the original call for papers. Each
paper has been peer reviewed by at least 2 independent experts.
The late breaking papers sessions allow authors to make a short
presentation of their work in the main programme. Printed copies of
the extended abstracts are circulated in delegate packs and, due to
the timescale, the full papers will be published electronically on the
conference web site.
Finally, I observe that with some online journal, it gets more difficult to have standard page numbers. Sometimes each paper gets a number. As much as I like citing papers correctly, may be page numbers are becoming useful when the work only exists in paper-like form: a DOI is an interesting alternative.
If it is as you describe, this was meant to be an informal session, showing preliminary results, not (yet) ready for publication. No wonder it wasn't included in the proceedings. So there should be a definitive version by the same authors elsewhere, or they just gave up because they found a fatal flaw (or just got bored, lost funding, ...). Take with a healthy dose of salt, and if citing it, mark it as an informal document.
@vonbrand Indeed, as far as I could check, none of the late breaking papers are in the ToC.
First off, the function of bibliographies is to make whoever reads your work can get hold of the referenced material, be it to check you didn't misrepresent anything, to drill down on some particular point, or something else. With this in mind, you owe it your readers (and yourself, later on building on the previous work) to make this as easy as possible. I.e., give as complete and detailed references as possible.
There are several possibilities. If this work was just presented, but not published in any proceedings, there just might be no "page numbers" at all. Some conferences just publish the papers as separate files e.g. on their webpage, again no page numbers. I've also seen (sloppily done) proceedings in which each paper had their pages numbered from 1.
I'd make an effort to get hold of a copy of the final version (as published) and check that one. How much effort really depends on how important it is to you. I have several BibTeX databases collecting what I've cited and used, and even documents I've checked but never used. From time to time I go over them and try to fill in missing details, check if the URLs I keep for my own use in there are still valid, and so on.
"I've also seen (sloppily done) proceedings in which each paper had their pages numbered from 1." - this may be a matter or preference. I would see this kind of "semantic page numbering" (somewhat meaningful page number in document, rather than an essentially arbitrary (with respect to the paper) page number in a collection of documents) as "intuitively done" or "straightforwardly done". With that said, I cannot remember I have ever used the page number from a reference when digging up a referenced document.
@O.R.Mapper, I have had to request documents by interlibrary loan, and giving exact page numbers was critical to get (copies of) the pages needed.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.515576 | 2016-02-23T14:45:46 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63866",
"authors": [
"Anais Merly Samillan Bernardo",
"ElXanys",
"Genaldo Silva de Holanda",
"Jose Godinez",
"Laurent Duval",
"Live In Fitness",
"Mohit Kumar Jangid",
"O. R. Mapper",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179030",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179031",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179032",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179065",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179067",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179097",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179099",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179103",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38057",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38135",
"negative seven",
"qiang li",
"vonbrand"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
7723 | Is checking the format of a paper an expected part of the reviewing process?
I have some papers to review and I am wondering whether I should do an in-depth inspection over the whole paper format? I see nothing major but there might be some tiny format errors here and there..
Does the organizing committee expect reviewers to check submissions
against the conference format?
I would say the responsibility of the reviewer is to judge the content of the paper. So, checking if the format of the journal/conference has been followed is not part of this job. Very large and obvious deviations can be pointed out, but for example spotting that the font of the caption is in size 11 and not 10 is not part of a reviewers task.
In general I agree with the other two answer but somehow in every paper that I have ever received a review for there has been some sort of comment on something formatting related from at least one of the reviewers. These have ranged from suggestions for changing the fonts of the formula or captions to spotting that font for footnotes should be 9 instead of 10 for that journal etc.
I think there is some sort of a code that if you find something you don't neglect it and ask for correction but in general that's not your job and you don't actively seek them you just "catch" them.
Reviewers check content. Copy editors, prior to publishing, check format and adherence to publication style guides.
Your Milage May Vary based on the expectations of your committee. If you have a question about what you are supposed to be checking don't be afraid to ask.
As grauwulf comments, your job is to focus on the content. However, when poor formatting clearly affects your ability to understand the scientific formatting, it should be commented upon. For instance, when somebody writes "x^2", but really means "x (Ref. 2)", that's a problem that should be commented on (because a copy editor might not catch that!). Similarly, if the way a graph is formatted makes it difficult to interpret (labels or legends too small to read, or are garishly presented), then it behooves the reviewer to mention it.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.516038 | 2013-02-02T21:41:04 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7723",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
13711 | Creating an central multi-purpose dictionary / database
I am trying to organize my workflow and make it more effective.
As non-native English-speaker studying in a foreign country I often need to look-up domain-specific translations (in 3 languages). As there are no specific dictionaries I am using textfiles containing translations I have collected over the time.
This is quite uncomfortable.
Often these words are related to some kind of mathematical definition which has to be stated as a theorem for proofs. Right now I usually copy these from my old publications.
It would be great to have some kind of central dictionary or knowledge-base where I could organize all this (Translations and Definitions).
Anyone who can recommend a program for this?
How do you organize definitions and domain-specific translations?
The question was intended to be more about managing knowledge than actual coding, the technical things were used to illustrate the intention, I changed the Question. Hope its more on-topic now.
thanks for editing into something more appropriate for the site (and welcome to Academia Stack Exchange!)
I would try http://termbases.eu/ a site that was mentioned under Software: Lexicons in Linguist List.
Broadly, what you have described is a lightweight variety of a dictionary writing system, software for developing a lexicon.
If you were translating digital documents, I would recommend translation memory software. Collecting and managing your multilingual context-specific translations is part of what translation memory software does.
Another possibility, if you happen to be comfortable setting up a wiki, is to create a wiki in the manner of Wiktionary.
The first website you introduced seems not to be free and has limitations over the free version. Do you know some open-source/free softwares or website services too?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.516260 | 2013-10-29T12:34:24 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13711",
"authors": [
"Douba",
"F'x",
"Frederik",
"Shaya Weinberger",
"VulfCompressor",
"enthu",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35282",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35283",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35284",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35288",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35309",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35310",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36236",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5621",
"lakshayg",
"renatofranca",
"user2387429",
"ydubey7"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
37924 | The exam time was less than the students expected
Some time ago, a course I visited had final exams, and the time announced to the students in advance (several weeks earlier via email by the instructor) was 3 hours. Rather shortly after the students began to write (about 20 minutes), it was announced as a clarification that the room was booked for 3 hours, while the test itself would only take 2 hours.
I did not take part in this exam (I took the second one, which had similar conditions), but I'm sure the students were quite surprised. The exam itself was of average difficulty, had it been 3 hours, but very tough in only 2. This was reflected in the results: 90% failed, instead of the usual 30-50%, and the best grade was only a "B-".
I'm interested if this sort of thing is less unusual than I would think, or if there is a protocol how to deal with it as a student?
If the instructor planed the exam for 2 hours, then an extra hour would had not helped: a 3 hour exam would had have more questions and the time average per question wuld had been the same...
So, was the problem only that the time during the exam was announced wrongly, but corrected quickly afterwards? Why would this be something that a student needs to "deal" with? Even if the announcer have said it correctly at the beginning, the exam would still have been difficult.
I was once in an exam we were told would be two hours, only to find that it actually lasted three hours. As @NickS suggests, the exam wasn't easier as there were just more questions than we expected.
Also, can you clarify what you mean by "It was announced to the students in advance"? Was this on the course outline? Announced by the instructor in class? Or was this done by somebody else than the instructor (i.e. exam times post around campus,...).
(I have edited in some clarifications)
Thank you all for your responses. I am not certain what time frame the instructor actually planned for. The exam's high difficulty and stark un-clarity before it made it seem as if he did not know it was going to be written in only 2 hours himself. In case it was intentional, though, I think you are completely right, and it was simply an unusually tough exam.
To avoid this, in all the exams I have taken, the time of ending was written in big letters on the blackboard before starting.
I would hope this is unusual because it's not very nice to the students. Students deserve to know in advance how much time will be given for the exam. And in my experience, they usually do know this quite far in advance.
It doesn't make sense to me that the figure mentioned in
the instructor's e-mail would refer to how long the room was booked (which is not something that the students would care about) rather than how much time would be given for the exam.
Another thing that doesn't make sense to me is why, when the instructor realized that the students thought they would have three hours for the exam, he didn't just keep quiet and let them have the three hours.
However, I don't know what you mean by a "protocol how to deal with it." You could certainly let the instructor know that you are unhappy about this aspect of the exam. But is there something that you think the instructor should do at this point to improve the situation?
Also, what does it mean to say that 90% of the students failed the exam? It's not necessarily a bad thing if 90% of the students got a numerical score below 60% on the exam, but it would be a very bad thing if 90% of the students got an 'F' grade in the course.
Those things made no sense to me as well. I'm not sure what additional actions could be taken, it certainly depends on if the exam was originally planned for 2 or for 3 hours.
The 90% referred to the percentage of 'F' grades. Usually, only about 30-50% of the students get an 'F' in this course.
@mafu That's a lot of 'F' grades, so the administration might see it as a problem even without knowing about the confusion regarding the allowed time. But in any case, probably the most it would do is to strongly suggest that the instructor not give so many 'F' grades in the future.
First, I think this is unusual, but I doubt that there is serious data about how common things like this are.
But the more important question seems to be: Can/Should I take action? What action?
This clearly depends: First, there may be a policy how the conditions of final exams have to be announced. At my university many "moduls" (i.e. courses) have a description where it is written "final exams according to the instructors announcements" and there is a general rule that this announcement has to happen in the first week of the course. Also there are general rule that say how long written exams can be. So if the announcement or the time constraints do not fit the actual conditions there could be room for an action to be taken.
What would happen if you (or a group of students) would file a complain to, e.g., the dean of student affairs (or somebody similar). I expect that the dean would talk to the instructor and asked what has happened. The instructor may answer respond that it was obvious that the exams time had to be shorter than the announced 3 hours and that he planned the exam for two hours. The dean may still be suspicious because of a high fail rate but this may also have other reasons. So in short: The instructor may get into mild to mediocre trouble but anything beyond that is unlikely. In an extreme case there could be a chance to rewrite the exam…
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.516474 | 2015-01-31T06:34:13 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37924",
"authors": [
"Amber Parker",
"Bunny Butt",
"Davidmh",
"Gio",
"HD189733b",
"K T",
"Karæthon",
"Nick S",
"Trevor Wilson",
"Ubiquitous",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103298",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103299",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103300",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103456",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103652",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103737",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12587",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5640",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6879",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7624",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8937",
"mafu",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
51510 | Meaning of et al. when referring to multiple papers with the same first author
I am citing some papers with the same first author but different co-authors.
For example, [1] is a paper by X, Y and Z, and [2] is a paper by X, A and B. Would X et al. [1,2] be appropriate here? because essentially et al. in [1] refers to people other than those referred to by et al. in [2].
There is a similar question about Harvard references. But I am interested in cases where only the reference number is shown in text.
Update in my field in computer science, it's common to refer to the first author and use et al. When there are multiple ones. Usually the first author is regarded as the one who did the majority of the work.
I understand this "X and others" to mean one specific set of (unnamed) people, unless they are the same bunch I'd write them separately. Just like when I was citing two papers by Chen together, but they were different Chens.
Perhaps use "X, Y et al. [203] and X, Z et al. [205]"?
In my experience with engineering, I usually see X and coworkers [1,2] in these situations. I have no knowledge if it is grammatically incorrect to use et alia ("and others") to refer to multiple papers with different authors, but I haven't ever noticed it being used that way. Also, you may come across the convention that it is not necessarily the first author used with X and coworkers, for instance, if the works all come from the lab of a well known researcher, one might prefer Smith and coworkers [1-3], where Smith is the PI of the lab.
See also this answer from Strongbad to a related question.
Remember that no matter what you write in the text, the really important thing is the bibliographic item. I would personally tend to avoid using X et al. [1,2] if [1] and [2] do not have the same list of authors. If I came to this point in writing, I would try to reword the sentence.
On the other hand, I would use sensible judgement. If it's clear that the articles come from the same group of investigators, just with one name missing or so, you are probably fine keeping the two things together.
Some other "out-of-the-box" options include:
Using [XYZ12] citation style; then it's clear that X et al. [XYZ12, XAB13] do not have the same list of authors.
Avoid putting people's names in front of the citations (not preferable in general I think)
Use more than one name before et al.
It is customary to use "et al." in a context in which it refers to one source only. If one author is not enough, one should add names until the reference becomes clearly identifiable.
If the authors are A, B, C, D, E and A, B, X, Y, Z, you could put
A, B, C et al., but "et al." is not used to refer to several papers.
If you need to mention X, et al. (et alii) would not be appropriate, these are not the same "others". And it should generally be used for three or more authors.
"In several works X coauthored [1,2], we see that" or "In [1,2] X and his coauthors say..."
But why would you need to mention X? You can use "From [1,2], we know that..."
Note that in some fields, your last form would be considered grammatically incorrect (due to historical reasons where references were originally footnotes, which cannot be part of grammatical constructs).
In some fields, indeed.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.516984 | 2015-08-14T19:36:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/51510",
"authors": [
"Alexcia Adair",
"Amandine Pinget PhD",
"Dương",
"Gayatri Patil",
"JohnB",
"Kevin Jablonka",
"Laurent Duval",
"Rafli Gunawan",
"Spammer",
"Tahereh Zarrat Ehsan",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"dds02",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/141681",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/141682",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/141683",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/141689",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/141690",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/141693",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/141697",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179266",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179270",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179278",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38057"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
14051 | Responsibilities of instructors to students when teaching controversial subjects
When teaching a course on a topic that might be controversial, what are the responsibilities of instructors to facilitate an open learning environment? If the instructor has a strongly held opinion, is it appropriate for the instructor to structure the course and the readings around this opinion? Does the instructor have a responsibility to structure the course in a way that is agnostic about the topic? When selecting the readings and the lecture schedule, does the instructor have a responsibility to give equal time to opposing viewpoints, if those opposing viewpoints plausibly have equal intellectual merit?
I'm familiar with the notion of academic freedom for instructors, where instructors should be protected from external influence (from outside the academy: e.g., from politicians) in their ability to shape their courses and express their findings and opinions. Is there a corresponding responsibility to protect the academic freedom of students, by structuring courses so that they do not make students feel uncomfortable expressing views that disagree with the instructor's?
Are there any guiding principles or resources for how these issues should be navigated? What are the social norms within academia? Are there any lines that, if crossed, might lead to disapproval from a significant fraction of fellow academics? I'm mostly familiar with engineering/science/mathematics courses where this sort of issue rarely comes up, so this is new to me.
@BenCrowell, that link doesn't answer my question. That question talks about what privileges are owed to instructors (and what is the impact on a professor of taking controversial opinions). I am asking about what instructors owe to students, and what the social norms are in academia. It's a different question. (FYI, I'm not asking about the guiding principles of academic freedom; I already know them very well. Rather, I'm asking about the guiding principles of teaching a course on controversial subjects, in a way that respects our students.)
@BenCrowell, by the way, thank you for the comment that the question seems scattered and unfocused. Do you have any suggestions how to make it more focused and less scattered? I'd welcome any ideas or suggestions!
@D.W. a motivating case might help make the question clearer. I would imagine in philosophy courses this could come up as the difference between materialism and a variety of Platonic idealism. Or economics courses where there are several current and intellectually reasonable "schools" as it were.
If the students are being assessed by you, some (most?) will start to tell you what you want to hear in order to get the highest grade. This is rarely what we as educators want in our students. We want to build within them critical thinking skills.
Controversial issues are common in some fields. For example, one of the subjects I teach is Business Ethics and I have clear beliefs and values in this area. Is it OK for me to focus on the arguments in favor of my view and discount competing arguments? No, it is not.
Can I tell my students my opinion? Opinions differ on this but I believe it is OK, as long as it is done very carefully with LOTS of evidence that my opinion is wrong. Again, students must be taught to think for themselves, including how to critically evaluate what they consider right and wrong. If I just make my points then it is not education, it is indoctrination and that is not what higher ed is about.
As far as social norms, I would say that if you are trying to get your students to 'believe' anything, then you are doing it wrong. If you are trying to get them to think critically, then you are doing it right. If the students feel they must agree with what you say, you are doing something wrong. If they feel like they are getting balanced information and a class ends up with many different opinions, then you are doing something right. If everyone is thinking the same, then nobody is thinking...and that's not good for anyone.
I am confused by I believe it is OK, as long as it is done very carefully with LOTS of evidence that my opinion is wrong. Also, should the first want in will start to tell you want you want to hear in order to get the highest grade. be 'what'? I like your answer, but I hesitate to upvote.
@scaaahu My point is that it is being 'untrue' to the spirit of seeking the truth if we are unwilling to state what we consider true (when many truths are possible). However, it is a slippery slope and it is very easy for a teacher to become a preacher of his 'one true way' as opposed to opening the eyes of the students (should be our goal). So, if we, as educators, share what we believe, we should only do so if we we also give plenty of counter-evidence showing clearly that, while we do have our views, we also see the value in other views. Also, thanks for catching the typo- I've fixed it.
Although I cannot say how the principles of, or basis for, university education are formulated everywhere, one guiding principle in the system I work is that courses/teaching should be founded on science. In the term science lies objectivity, that is to show both pros and cons for a specific idea. this does not preclude one from having personal opinions we all have. One example:
In my university a scientist, known for controversy, decided to run a course on divining rods under the pretext they were serious and work. Now, one can have an opinion about this but when trying to look for a scientific background, the best one can say is absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The university clamped down very hard on this because it broke the founding principles of university education due to a lack of critical discussion.
So, a person's opinion should not taint the material so as to skew the picture based on unscientific principles. If one runs a course that uses sound scientific principles to criticize a view point, the exercise to evaluate the criticism may be sound in itself. The issue therefore lies in openness about any "one-sidedness" of the course. The role of a university teacher/teacher, is after all to provide objective critical view of materials.
One way to look at this is to compare with research. If we try to push a view uncritically, our peers are likely to suggest rejection of that article. To not approach teaching with the same serious rigour is, I would argue, unprofessional. The problem maybe lies in that there is no peer review of course materials.
I am unsure whether the supposed objectivity, the term "science" carries, is a sufficient guideline for controversial issues. If you look at debates about e.g. alternative medicine, people express different opinions about the content of "objectivity", "evidence" and "criticism". A recent popular case in Europe was prof. Walach who advocates a so-called "weak quantum theory" to defend homeopathy. Maybe, you could specify more precise what objectivity means in science?
The continuation of the second sentence is fairly clear to me. If you advocate something, you are not weighing pros and cons and providing the information without bias.
Although I agree with you (especially in the given examples), I don't think that this argumentation is sufficient because pseudoscience actually claims that the "orthodoxy" in science is biased in their basic concepts. Therefore, I think it would be good to make very clear and transparent what concepts like objectivity and evidence mean in science. I know that this is tedious and it might seem too obvious to scientists.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.517303 | 2013-11-13T00:06:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14051",
"authors": [
"BSteinhurst",
"Ben Holland",
"Benubird",
"BlueWizard",
"D.W.",
"Maxime Lucas",
"Nobody",
"Peter Jansson",
"Re-Searcher",
"earthling",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36241",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36242",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36243",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36249",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36258",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36302",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36388",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/705",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7561",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8067",
"lpsandaruwan",
"non-numeric_argument",
"rhialto"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
4918 | Changing Interests After Getting Accepted for PhD
I have brought some trouble onto myself I know, but what can be done by someone in my situation.
I applied and got accepted for a PhD program in Computer Science. I automatically assumed that I wanted to continue the work I did on my Master's thesis and I identified a professor who would be willing to work with me on that subject. When I got there, I reviewed the literature (there had been a few years of gap since defending my thesis) and decided I really did not like the direction the field was going in. I had been developing a new interest anyway, so I changed sub-disciplines. Now, no one will commit to be my advisor, at best maybe co-advisor with some outside expert. Part of the reason is because my school lacks experts in that area. I personally (on a friend basis) know some Computer Science professors, but none are experts in my field. What can I do? No advisor = No PhD, I know that much anyway.
Changing a subject during the PHD course is legitimate, and not very rare. However, finding an advisor is a must. I think in that case you'll have no choice but trying to convince professors to be your advisors.
A possible way is to find an expert from a different university, that will be your co-advisor. That way you'll just need to find another faculty in your university that is not-too-far from your interests. You might find someone that will tentativly be your advisor, and once you show some progress will agree to take you under..
But maybe the big question is,
why not moving to the place where the "experts" are?
Alternatively: Why choose a research area with no local experts? Are you really completely uninterested in everything your department's faculty does?
@JeffE Does it really make sense to work in academia mainly on a topic one is not interested in?
@PiotrMigdal: Nope. On the other hand, does it really make sense to work in academia if you're only interested in one narrow topic?
@JeffE I would say I have a passion in what I am doing now, I just did not go down an a la carte menu saying I would like this and that. But, yes, I am not very interested in what the faculty does and they are not very interested in what I do. Like I find robotics cool, but cool does not make a PhD thesis.
@RanG. Yes, jumping ship would be great, but I would lose what I have done so far and because I would assume I would have to establish some rapport first and perhaps even have a commitment before I jump ship from someone who would be my advisor. It just seems difficult to get my foot in the door and convincing someone outside my University that doesn't know who on earth I am that I am someone worth working with and in the event of another University that in addition to the students properly admitted that I am worth the time.
I do not think changing topics on a PhD research is totally unheard off. In fact, as Ran mentioned, it's probably more common than one would think.
Now, the advisor is indeed an issue. The problem is that it looks bad on professors if they do not understand what are you doing, and if the field is unrelated to them that might happen. Did you try looking for an advisor in other area, where what you want to do is applied?
Perhaps a nice way to approach the issue is to do a more formal research plan and a good application in mind, that might attract some advisor or at least give a strong case to an outside expert.
In these days distance should not be an issue for a CS research.
The applied aspect is a great suggestion and could have worked for me, but in the overlap majors my University also is not so strong. I also like your suggestion about trying to get that outside expert. I am trying to do my own research and pin down exactly what I would propose for my thesis work. Maybe even get published on my own if I can. It feels like such an uphill battle without the support of an advisor, but hopefully I get that advisor.
To get an outside expert just google the name of people related to the topic. Try seeing who are the top of their field, and look for recent graduates that just got posts, they are also in dire need of people to supervise to pump their resumes
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.517990 | 2012-10-23T01:41:50 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/4918",
"authors": [
"Florian von Stosch",
"JeffE",
"John Greeley",
"Leon palafox",
"Neptune",
"Phorce",
"Piotr Migdal",
"Tom Johnson",
"Tyler",
"Yvan",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12534",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12535",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12536",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12537",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12538",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12539",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12540",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12560",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2806",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3903",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"kajacx",
"meawoppl"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
1261 | Simplest way to jointly write a manuscript?
As with many papers in the sciences, there are multiple authors who aren't physically close to each other. I was curious about the most efficient and simplest way to technically share the writing. On the more complicated side would be LaTeX and subsequently using subversion to merge all of the changes. Then there is google docs. Finally, there is the traditional write out edits on word and email the document with comments back and forth.
What works?
You forgot one traditional approach: "I am releasing the token for Section 2; updated latex source is attached to this email. I now claim the token for Sections 3 and 4."
I should add, my advisor is not technically proficient. Hence the emphasis on simplest
Look here: Simultaneous collaborative editing of a LaTeX file - tex.SE.
I use a SubVersioN repository service, many of them are available online for free (see e.g. http://xp-dev.com/).
You need to put one of the authors in charge. Otherwise the one who is not technically proficient would be the bottleneck.
If you literally mean the simplest way (even slightly more so than JeffE's excellent comment), then you can't get any simpler than the naive approach: pass a single file back and forth by e-mail, with the recipient having total control until they e-mail it back. This is the only approach I know of that requires no technical proficiency or special software at all (beyond what is needed to write a single-authored paper), and that avoids any complications regarding multiple files, copying and pasting, or who exactly has permission to do what. This may be overkill, but sometimes it helps.
@AnonymousMathematician - Having the technically incompetent one edit and the competent one do the merging can work just fine.
@eykanal: Good point, although you still need to have made some arrangement for how to avoid (or handle) conflicting edits to the same section.
@JeffE I look forward to the day when manual token passing is viewed as an antique relic akin to etching on stones :)
@Suresh Aawwww.
If your collaborator is not technically inclined, then there are a few possibilities:
Google Docs
It is very simple, robust and real-time (no need of thinking 'which version is the most recent'). I created a lot of documents with it (though only 1 scientific article). A good idea is to use different colours so that it is clear who wrote what. One drawback is that it may be not as simple for equations and than you will need to copy things from there to LateX manually.
Annotating PDF files with Adobe Reader or sth equivalent
Also simple and robust. However, as it is not real-time you need to keep track of which version is current and it is not possible to make changes in the same time. Here you are the only person responsible for changes in LaTeX file.
Annotating or changing with OpenOffice, MS Word or another office package...
Another variant which allows you collaborator to make direct changes, at cost of some robustness.
As a practical remark for the two last: always keep track of the version, e.g. draft_20120424_prof.pdf, where you add both date of the last edit (not final5!) and name of the last editor. When exchanging things by e-mail it is easy to loose track which version is the most recent and in fact lost changes (often not knowing about that.)
Other possibilities, requiring some technical knowledge:
writeLaTeX or sth similar (ShareLaTeX, ScribTeX, LaTeX Lab - the one using GoogleDocs, ...)
Tools for editing documents collaboratively (in real-time) and compile it within one's browser (so no need to install anything). Though some knowledge of LaTeX is required (at least to know how not to spoil a file).
ScribTeX(the only one I used) gives version control and you can see which lines were changed (as in version control system), so not need of guessing what might have been changed.
EDIT: ScribTeX is being replaced by ShareLaTeX.
writeLaTeX has live preview and may be the most suitable for beginners.
Git or another version-control system, e.g. at GitHub
However, it may require technical skills beyond edition of LaTeX. While it is not hard to use it, I never did I am using it for writing papers and I would never try to use it with someone with low computer literacy.
When it comes to Dropbox - it is a good stuff for sharing files for a project but NOT for making changes in files. First, you never know when the changes happen. Second, you don't know where the changes happen.
There is also an article on it: Research tips - Online collaborative writing.
See also a few questions:
Simultaneous collaborative editing of a LaTeX file - tex.SE
Tools for collaborative paper-writing - MathOverflow
Compiling documents online - tex.SE
+1 nice array of possibilities, and warning about Dropbox! LaTeX + Git is still my favourite.
As the third suggested question points out, the LaTeX Lab is a good solution. However, it lacks some functionality. But it would get you started. I prefer that option.
@adn: Added LaTeX Lab, thanks. Actually, I have tried it before, but the "revision history" was not working (and still it does not work).
If you're working with Word documents, Word 2007 included a very nifty merge changes feature. This online help document from microsoft.com details how it works, but doesn't really do the feature justice. See the following screenshot for an idea:
Briefly, you can click on "compare" (in ribbon, third from right), and it lets you choose two source documents. From there, it opens the very nice interface shown above, with the two source docs on the right, the merged doc in the middle, and the changes on the left (or bottom, you can hide it if you don't wan t it). You use it like any other "track changes"; just go through, change by change, using the "previous", "next", "accept", and "reject" buttons om the Changes section of the ribbon. When you're done just save the combined document, and you've got your merged doc.
I've used this a number of times, and it's a very useful feature. By far the best aspect of this is that it can be used with the technically incompetent. Just tell them, "take the document, make changes, I'll deal with it"; I've used this with my technologically challenged boss a number of times, and it's been a lifesaver. Given your situation, this may be your best bet.
Horrible. Writing a paper in Word.
@DaveClarke - When life gives you lemons...
shrug If you need to use it, here it is. I've never written an academic paper in Word, and I never will, but for those who do, here you go. I'm not recommending it; I'm just informing of a feature.
unfortunately, many ecology journals will only accept Word files. I have taken to writing my manuscripts in html just so that word will open them - it is embarrassing for my field.
We do token passing and some kind of method to exchange the files. I think this method was covered in the comments but let me elaborate it here. I'll use Word as an example, since chances are if you're doing manual token passing, it's because you haven't been able to convince anyone in your team to switch to LaTeX, and people who don't want to switch to LaTeX are probably the type who don't want to deal with version control.
The "shared folder" is the mechanism you use for sharing files. It could be a Dropbox folder, email, WebDAV, a remote directory on an SSH-accessible server, etc.
Locking: Person who starts with the file renames it so that their name is on the end. They send an email to the group saying, "I am locking Section 1." List the locks in the email.
Unlocking: This is a multi-step process.
a. If no one else unlocked a section before you unlocked, then you can rename the file to the current date and time, then put it in the shared folder.
b. If another collaborator unlocked a section before you unlocked, then you must take the latest version off of the shared folder, copy the section you were working on, and paste it into the latest version you just downloaded. Rename the just-edited file to the current date and time, then put it in the shared folder.
The reason you do it this way and not the other way (copying and pasting everyone else's sections into your document) is because doing so means you have to keep track of what everyone else did, whereas this way you only need to keep track of what you did.
That's basically it. The biggest problem is when someone's not paying attention and doesn't merge properly, or when two people try to lock something at the same time (since Email has a delay) but usually you'll have to have someone who knows the process keep an eye out for it.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.518375 | 2012-04-24T08:20:45 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1261",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Anthony Labarre",
"DQdlM",
"Dave Clarke",
"Geoff",
"JeffE",
"Nobody",
"Piotr Migdal",
"Suresh",
"Thaís Bardini Idalino",
"Vidviner",
"Zenon",
"adn",
"bobthejoe",
"eykanal",
"gavioto",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14952",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23594",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23605",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/248",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/249",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/257",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9556"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
2760 | Organizing my reading list in Mendeley
I keep publications from the literature in Mendeley for later reading on my iPad. There are many publications, so I need some sort of way of prioritizing the ones I need to read first versus the ones I might read someday. Right now, I use folders with varying priority levels. The biggest problem is that I cannot move articles to different folders on the iPad, so I have to do this prioritization while I'm at my computer (where I usually have more important things to do). Also, I feel like I spend most of my time assigning priorities to articles rather than reading them, which is not ideal.
Do you have better suggestions on how to prioritize and organize the publications I want to read using Mendeley?
Can you use tags instead of folders? I think you and add and remove tags using the iOS client, but don't have one handy to check.
My other question would be what you're trying to accomplish with prioritization. Maybe instead of pre-sorting them you could just search for a keyword or author or tag to pull up the ones you want on-demand?
You can add and remove tags but I don't think you can search by tag. I'm not looking for specific papers, I need a list of papers I should read now, soon, or someday.
Yes, you can search by tag (in the desktop version only, though. Not online, afaik). If, for example, you want to find the papers tagged with the word andrea, you just type tag:andrea in the search box.
One option would be to create a tags P1, P2, P3, P4 ... and assign "rating" to articles how much priority they have. Tags could be updated as priority changes.
(similar system could be used with Delicious.com tags to websites)
Tags are more flexible then folders. Mainly - Multiple membership in more than one tags
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.519069 | 2012-08-05T02:16:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2760",
"authors": [
"Cosmic Ossifrage",
"Michael Hoffman",
"VPeric",
"William Gunn",
"bchetty",
"boscovich",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/582",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/663",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6920",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6921",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7512"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
1275 | When and why a scientific technical report is written?
While making some paper search in my scientific field, sometimes I find articles that are not published in journals or conference proceedings, but as technical reports.
In my experience, I've never written a technical report, and I've never even been asked to do it.
So I was wondering: what's the difference between a technical report and a scientific paper?
Why some researchers publish a work as technical report instead of sending it to a conference or a journal?
When do you suggest to write one instead of addressing it to a conference or a journal?
PS: It seems to me that writing technical reports is more diffused in English-speaking world than in Continental Europe. Is it true? Why?
Technical reports are just a slightly more formal form of preprint. It's not an alternative to conferences or journals, except in rare cases when something is judged worthy of disseminating but somehow unsuitable for publication. Occasionally something inadvertently stays as a technical report forever, for example if the authors try and fail to get it published, or if they lose interest. (For example, sometimes a student who is leaving academia writes a technical report before going, but nobody else cares enough to try to get it formally published.)
Perhaps it varies by field but other uses I have come across in my field are;
Required by a grant funding agency (i.e. a report of the findings from the study to the grant agency). Here is such an example of a NIJ report. These tend to be much longer and more detailed than a single journal article.
Reports disseminated by other institutions. For instance, the non-for-profit I work for releases technical reports that we want to disseminate to the public (the same goes for the state agency I work for). The material may be the same as subsequent journal articles but the intended audience is not limited to academics and is much broader. Here is an example of this by the RAND corporation. Another popular one in the Social Sciences is the Campbell collaboration library of meta-analysis.
These are similar to what Charles stated, but I would nit-pick a bit with the motivation. They aren't always just another means to disseminate what are otherwise journal articles. It is also a very potential heterogeneous field of papers. The RAND and Campbell articles I cited above are typically considered very high esteem (and go through a similar peer-review process to more typical journals). But pretty much any agency can release a technical report (put your agency name on it and post the pdf on the internet) so they can vary dramatically in quality.
In the particle physics world---where we have large organization that operate for decades---"technical report" is one of the several names given to internal documents and communications with the funding agencies that are intended to
communicate important technical details between units (e.g. the accelerator division needs to inform the experimental scientists of the operational limits of the beam position monitors)
propagate and preserve specialized knowledge and competencies
to document details that won't be written up in a paper for many years (large experiments often leave off writing a detailed description of the experiment as built and run until after several data papers have appeared; by the time you get ready to write this "instrumentation paper" many of the people who installed the device may have moved on)
provided supporting justification for grant requests and project proposals
demonstrate readiness to actually start spending money on conditionally approved projects (which is essentially all US projects in the post SSC era; and both the Europeans and the Japanese have similar administrative protections)
Accordingly most particle physicist will spend some time writing such documents every few years.
In addition to the answers already posted, sometimes when a professor is given a professorial chair (endowment), he or she is required to submit formal documentation describing the research done while "sitting in the chair." Some departments/colleges/universities will accept (non-refereed) technical reports in lieu of refereed papers just to get around the technicality.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.519250 | 2012-04-25T14:00:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1275",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"BehzaD",
"Pasted",
"Philip Cho",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10800",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10801",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10802",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10803",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"wrez"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
24295 | What to do when you discover computational errors and mistakes in your accepted paper at the proof stage?
My paper is accepted with minor revisions and now is in proof stage. Unfortunately, I have found computational errors in my calculations which have led to some wrong results.
What should I do?
It's hard to say without knowing the paper, but this does sound like a pretty significant difference. I am honestly not sure what the procedure is in this case, but it is very likely that your paper may have to be re-reviewed in light of the new data.
Talk to the senior editor in charge of your paper.
Send a mail to the editor and just add a sentence that tells the charts were normalized.
I think corrigenda, not errata, should be used, because it is an author's error rather than production error.
Sometimes mistakes happen. Yes, it's a pain to have to deal with this mistake now after the paper was accepted for publication, but it's a good thing that you caught your mistake before the paper was published.
Note: If you have coauthors, before doing anything, contact your coauthors and explain to them the changes you need to make. Do this before doing anything else.
What should I do? Should I send the errata to editor or copy editor?
As you mentioned that you are dealing with an IEEE journal, my response here is specific to the IEEE:
Talk to the senior editor that you are working with currently. Tell them specifically the changes you want to make and that "the logic of the concluding remarks is still correct and the discrepancies only impact the affected numerical results and the specific conclusions drawn from them," and that "the other numerical results are correct."
The senior editor will take it from there. Based on my past experience, you do not need to contact the editor-in-chief about this directly.
Will it affect my paper's value?
No, but I don't really follow why you think correcting a mistake will affect your paper's value. Correcting a mistake prior to publication is a good thing.
Will it need to go through another review cycle?
This will depend on the steps taken by the senior editor.
If your findings and conclusions are unambiguously unaffected, send the results to the editor saying you found an error with the numbers and asking for it be fixed. The editor might be annoyed at the last minute change but they are used to this sort of thing. I don't know what your "paper value" refers to.
You seem pretty worried about this. If this is because you think other people might assume that this difference would, in fact, have affected the findings and the way in which your paper was reviewed? If so, that is an issue. If this is a concern, you should email the academic editor and explain the situation. If things are as you think, there won't be an issue. If the editor disagrees, the paper might be need to be re-reviewed. In any case, it certainly seems best to have this all above board.
Changes in language, like changes in numbers, can have an important impact on a paper. As an author, you have a responsibility to not make substantively important changes to either after the paper has been accepted. It's your responsibility to not abuse the editorial system. If you are worried that you might be, you need to talk to your editor.
If you really care about the validity of your data and that it may be used for future research by yourself and others, I would say that it is vital to send the errata to the editor and you will feel better for three reasons:
You will have produced and published an honest piece of empirical research, unlike many shady and incomplete papers out there.
You never want to be accused of fudging your numbers by your colleagues/peers.
If you were the editor of this journal, would you like to foster a sense of scholarly pride in your published paper's validity, re-testability etc?
It will probably have to be re-reviewed, but if you're up front and honest with the editor or copy-editor about the errata, it's unlikely they'll reject the paper.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.519606 | 2014-07-02T21:22:41 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24295",
"authors": [
"Angelina Gibson",
"Anna_Sv",
"Jagadeesh Malineni",
"Karthik Hubli",
"MAHDY",
"Mad Jack",
"May",
"Qifeng Zhang",
"Sharon Douglas",
"TheOld Crab",
"Tom",
"Vilma",
"Zeina K. Ahmed",
"adipro",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10936",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11192",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15949",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65158",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65159",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65160",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65162",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65175",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65176",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65177",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65178",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65179",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65182",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65185",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65505",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65514",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65582",
"nottmey",
"padawan",
"user1691278",
"userManyNumbers",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
52163 | How to find the right balance between a challenging and an enjoyable mathematics exercise session?
Next semester, I will be leading exercise sessions in a first year course of mathematics. More precisely, the course is Linear Algebra and the audience consists of young, first year undergraduate mathematics-students. The course is taught at a university in continental Europe. Judging from my personal experience, I know that most first year students of mathematics have plenty of troubles with the new, abstract material that is taught at a university. Hence, it would be good to make the student's experience in my exercise sessions as "easy" and enjoyable as possible.
However, I am not a fan of just doing simple, easy and short exercises. My opinion is that you do not make things easier for the students, if you omitt doing the hard exercises and just do the easy ones. Of course, this does not mean that everything I want to do is hard, but every now and then, something difficult will have to be discussed in the exercise sessions. Often, the hardest exercises are the most enlightening ones.
Moreover, my experience tells me that most students have wrong expectations of an exercise class: they expect to understand everything without (only a tiny bit) personal contribution and blame the instructor (which would be me in that case), if they do not understand everything. This has happened more than once to me and if I tell them that they have to work, I am considered to be the 'strict teacher', whose subject is the most important one and who does not understand that the new material is hard. I would be totally fine with that image, but this demotivates students and let them feel safe because they have someone to blame (Once, I heard the sentence "I would have understood the new material, but the exercise class was too bad and on a too high level" - in my opinion, I discussed everything in detail and pointed out which things are the most important ones and focussing on these).
In short, I find myself in the following vicious circle (it seems like you can achieve two of the three things below at a time, but not all three together):
Maximizing the students' enjoyment level (i.e., they should understand as much as possible and just have a good time during my exercise class)
Doing an exercise class which is on a reasonable (not too high, but also not too low) level
Keep the students motivated and tell them quite clearly, that they have to work to understand the new material
Or - in very short - the question is: Which aspects constitute a good exercise class (in mathematics) and which of these aspects are the most important ones?
"first year course of mathematics." That's very ambiguous: please clarify which degree program and include the broad geographic location (e.g. England, US, continental Europe, India...). In fact, even specifying the subject could be helpful, or at least clarifying whether there is a specific subject. I am a math professor, and I'm finding it hard to answer the question at the current level of generality.
Note that while this is not off topic here, you might choose to move it to [matheducators.se] if you want, if you think it might get better answers there. (But please don't post it on both sites, that is against SE network policy.)
Thank you ff524. I'll let the question here. And @Pete L. Clark, I have edited my question. Thank you too for your comment!
Go for the second and the third points. When I took analysis, at the very first lesson, during the first proof on set theory, the professor paused to say: "You shouldn't expect to understand now the whole proof: try to grasp the concepts, and then work hard at home to develop a better understanding." But it was 26 years ago, maybe now the expectations are different.
You're presenting a false dichotomy. The best exercises are both challenging and enjoyable!
I agree with @JeffE. When I took set theory, I was bored with the tautology exercises in the first chapter and I did not enjoy them at all. But, I enjoyed every exercise in the Axiom of Choice, well ordering and Zorn's Lemma chapter.
As a grad student now who took undergrad linear algebra with a professor I really liked, I will attempt to generalize what I saw that worked.
The best way for students to learn something that is as potentially abstract as linear algebra is to relate it to something concrete. My professor always liked to point out that once you leave R2 and R3, everyone visualizes geometry differently. As a result, he often tried to keep his visual explanations in that space.
However, for higher dimensional vectors, you can still relate the material to multi-dimensional concepts without drawing a picture. A great example (and pretty interesting exercise) is Markov chains. When we went over eigenvalues and eigenvectors, we motivated all of the math by walking through Markov chains. He used Markov chain gambling schemes (e.g. holding a bet steady when you win, doubling when you lose) to illustrate eigen-decomposition in a practical way. In that way you can help students develop intuition by talking about something that makes sense outside of the math-sphere.
In terms of practical exercises, I've found that progressive problems tend to work best. That is, where each problem is working towards one ultimate problem solution. Generally, each step is a little more complex as well. For example, maybe the first step is finding the Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors, the second is diagonalization, the third is something tangential like inverting the matrix, and the last is applying what you've calculated to some practical problem like a Markov Chain.
In other words, ease students into the harder material by showing them the simpler ways to do it first. Once you can intuitively understand the general concept at basic level, it's easier to move on to more advanced views of the same and similar concepts. Plus, when students see complex material from the viewpoint of something simpler to understand (like maximizing gambling winnings), it provides a reference point for them to start from.
marcman.. .do you have notes, slides about what you just talked? :) I would have loved to take this one step at a time with practical examples because this is the only way I can learn something .. and I <3 Markov Chains
In addition to the helpful comments and answer already provided:
Please let go of the idea of enjoyment and look for engagement.
I have fond memories, from my calculus classes, of the portion of the class when the teacher had us all go up to the blackboard to write up solutions to some of the homework problems. Each student had a section of blackboard to work in and a particular problem to solve. Then we all sat down again and compared what was in our notebooks with what we saw on the board. You could get up and go look at a problem closer if you wanted to. Discussion among students was permitted and you could ask the teacher a question.
When I was a language teacher, I was trained to include a variety of types of activities in each class. This is a good thing to do in math too. Some abstract reasoning, some mechanical matrix manipulations, some verbalization.
Make sure you do some spiral review, meaning, you should generally take 5 or 10 minutes to throw some problems at them from earlier units in the semester. If you notice that students are getting caught off guard by this, then tell them ahead of time what sections you'll be drawing review problems from during the next session.
You asked about the easier problems. A good place to put those is in the beginning, as a confidence-building, getting into gear, warm-up. The warm-up should last 3 - 5 minutes.
Keep your "lecturing" to an absolute minimum.
A discussion session (that's the term in the U.S.) is a great place for students to make connections with fellow students, that might result in small study groups being formed. Encourage these connections!
Watch the gender dynamics carefully. If you start to see some males behaving in a show-off-y way, and some females getting very quiet, that's a red flag, and it's time to try some new ideas.
I know you're not supposed to ask the identical question at the math educators site, but I would strongly encourage you to come up with a similar question to ask there -- you'll get more helpful ideas there.
Also, observe some other instructors' exercise sessions as a fly on the wall, and notice what works well and what doesn't work so well. And ask students what works well and not so well for them.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.520242 | 2015-08-23T20:07:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/52163",
"authors": [
"JeffE",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Nobody",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Slash_",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24491",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39014",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"moldovean"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
23781 | Is it reasonable to use full word and abbreviation in parenthesis in a chapter title?
Can I use full word plus its abbreviation in parenthesis in a chapter title?
here is my case:
Chapter 2
Human Immune System (HIS)
is it correct? Is there any differences if the the full word have appeared before in the previous chapter content.
In general, the only abbreviations that should be used in "headlines" and titles are "standard" ones that are normally (or at least very frequently) written in their abbreviated form. So, something like Escherichia coli could obviously be written as E. coli in a title without problems. (Similarly, in my field, we have an algorithm entitled "particle–particle particle–mesh" which can be written as "PPPM" or "P3M" without detriment.)
However, any abbreviation that you have introduced in the course of writing should probably be avoided unless the alternative is too unwieldy. Moreover, you should not normally use both abbreviations and the expanded text unless you're using the title to define the abbreviation: for instance,
SAUCE: Simplified Abbreviations for Unwieldy Complex Expressions
I can not say this is incorrect, but it is probably unorthodox. If there are no strong reason to put an abbreviation in the title, you may wish to introduce it in the first sentences of the chapter itself.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.520977 | 2014-06-22T07:07:16 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23781",
"authors": [
"GenericHumanoid",
"Joseph Joey",
"KrishnanIyer",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63597",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63598",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63599",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63609",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63613",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63614",
"linzrobibero",
"sharur",
"user116848",
"user63609"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
5552 | Is completing two years of your PhD sufficient to satisfy journal reviewing requirement of having a PhD?
For reviewing papers, some journals ask you to have a PhD degree.
I want to know, if the PhD degree is the obtained certificate at the end of your PhD, or it could be also be, for example, your third inscription in the PhD (you have previously two succefull years in preparing the degree).
"Having a PhD" means that you completed the entire degree program—including writing, defending, and depositing a dissertation—and were formally awarded a degree by the host university. Current PhD students would not qualify as reviewers for the journal you describe.
As a related followup (perhaps this is not the place?): I sometimes get emails asking for reviews that open with a line like "Dear Dr. Doucette". No mention is made that I must have a PhD to review, but there does seem to be an implicit assumption that I do have one. In such a case, am I obligated to inform the editor explicitly that I do not have a PhD?
@JohnDoucette No, I don't think so. The editor is just erring on the side of caution; it's better not to leave off the "Dr." in case you do have a PhD. And most journals (fortunately) don't have a stupid degree requirement for refereeing.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.521134 | 2012-12-01T16:27:25 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5552",
"authors": [
"JeffE",
"John Doucette",
"Kaka Abel",
"NotMe",
"Rup",
"Tubai",
"Vivek Verma",
"Yoda",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1125",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/120644",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/120645",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14378",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14379",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14380",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14393",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14399",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"mdd"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
62354 | Should I inform my professor of a very recent paper vaguely related to his research?
I'm currently an undergrad student and have found a recent paper, published in Nature a few days ago, that represents a huge breakthrough in its field (I'm active in that area, so I'm aware of it), but has barely been reported elsewhere.
One of my professors is doing research in a related, but not the same area. I was thinking of sending him a short email along the lines of "It seemed like this might be of interest to you, so just for your information: There has been a breakthrough in [area] recently, published at [link to Nature online], in which ..." and one or two sentences about the content.
It is nothing that requires a lot of thought to understand, and the fact that it happened at all is more important than the details. One can easily understand most of it from the abstract.
Would such an email generally be considered more of an annoyance, or acceptable?
Update:
Thank you all for your helpful answers and also the many interesting comments. I have sent him an email and received a short reply.
I would modify the wording slightly in the direction of "Just in case you have not already seen this....". I don't think you should assume the professor is unaware of developments in his field.
Sounds like the deepmind go paper. ;-) Just don't wait for too long otherwise he will surely have heard of it already.
@BlindKungFuMaster Indeed. I gather my perception was correct in this case, then :) I will heed the good advise of user Chris White though.
Treat a professor like anyone else - this email is an attempt to be helpful and would not be an annoyance. Just be somewhat aware of your tone - if you do not know the professor as well, you don't want to be overly-familiar.
Yes, send it. We all like to get links to papers we might have missed. I would leave out the "breakthrough" part. He may have seen it (or even reviewed it), but there is no harm in sending it along to either him or his entire research group.
In general, I'd expect a positive reaction from a professor to a student who is reading cutting edge papers in related fields, with the wisdom to see where things are actually related.
E-mailing the whole research group seems excessive to me, especially since there are chances that they already know it.
In the absolute worst case scenario I can imagine the professor's response could be:
"who's this little upstart sending me papers in my own field? I know very well what's going on!"
Of course this is worst case, I would never expect this to happen... but it might. If you wanted cover all your bases and minimise your chances of appearing like a "little upstart" (this is probably only a tiny chance to begin with), you can always phrase your email as requesting an opinion:
"I came across this paper, I wonder what your thoughts are?" or "what do you think the implications of this paper could be?"
It's an especially useful tactic if you are cold-calling.
No! You are changing an attempt to be helpful into something the supervisor needs to do.
True, but I wouldn't say "needs to do". They might respond, they might not, but either way it paints the sender as a conscientious student who is taking some initiative, while avoiding making the student look like they are presuming anything about the professor.
I agree with @StrongBad, offering information is fundamentally different than requesting that someone analyse information and give an opinion on it. It's irrational to expect that someone would get offended that you didn't expect them to have read something, if anything include a question like "have you seen this research?" that can be responded to (ie, not ignored) without increasing the professor's workload.
[EDIT: due to an interesting mix of positive and negative reactions, I have provided additional context, mainly for robot readers. I am not against emails, but sometimes words can be more efficient, see at the end]
Providing useful information to others is a great quality. It shows you care. To know that you have provided useful information to a person requires feeback. Feedback is an central concept in biology. A good information "should" be provided to the right person, at a right time, with an appropriate medium.
In our time of email avalanche (I get about 20 emails a day with a link to read "for my information"), may I suggest you to do something less virtual:
print the paper, read it carefully, pick an important piece of information so that you can talk about it easily
when you meet your professor (at the end of a lecture, dropping by his office), ask whether she/he has 5 minutes to talk about a paper you have found
convey your information: "I read that... and thought this paper was in your scope of interest". If the professor seems interested, and did not read it, or only browsed it fast (as I do most of the time when someone only send me an email with pdf link withoout more context), offer him/her the "physical" paper if interested.
if your professor does not have time, do not insist. You have proposed something, now it is up to the professor for the next move.
You may have a more direct feedback than with an email lost in a mailbox.
A final personal note, from a fellow PhD, a long time ago in a galaxy far far away. When he wrote a email to his advisor, and the advisor found the mail too long, too complicated for the purpose, he replied with 6 letters:PLSSPK. Meaning: "please, speak".
I disagree with this answer. As a professor, I would vastly prefer that someone point me via email to a recent paper I might be interested in than scheduling a meeting to discuss it with me. First of all, that scheduling requires an email. Second, 5 minutes is never 5 minutes. Third, is the point of this to inform me of developments in the field or to impress me with the student's insights?
Wow, I am shocked by the negative reaction to this answer. Exactly why does the university bother to have a physical campus if this is the prevailing attitude/practice? Isn’t live in-person collegial student-professor interaction one of the primary purposes to a university?
@Raghu Parthasarathy as a professor and an advisor, I like to give credit to people, but also provide directions. I am glad I do not need an email schedule to talk with humans ("that scheduling requires an email"). I am glad when someone (a student, a colleague) drop by my office to give me an information. It means to me it is important enough to the person to move his **s from a chair. Then, if the information is known to me, or weak, I can explain face to face why, and how I would like to interact in the future: "this is outside the scope, but this other domain is interesting to me".
@Basil Bourque I am surprised as well, and your support means to me. I believe this reaction is an interesting sign of times, and will add some details later this evening. Now I have to go to work, and talk to human colleagues (including my present PhD student)
@BasilBourque live in-person student-professor interaction is important. This answer proposes changing the interaction from letting someone know about a paper into a short discussion about the paper. If instead, the answer proposed that instead of emailing the paper the student should give the professor a printed version, that would be fine in my mind.
@Larent Duval, and others: Thanks for the comments. I realize I sound grumpy. A point of clarification. I encourage students who I'm working with in my lab, undergrads and graduate students, to come and drop in, in person, which they do quite a lot of. I do the same and we spend lots of unscheduled time in face-to-face interactions. I would love to extend this to the 60 students in the class I teach, or to any student at the University, rather than asking that they come to scheduled office hours or arrange times to meet, but if I did this, it would be disastrous for me, my lab, and my class.
@Raghu Parthasarathy The OP was a personal and positive intiative. I also encourage colleagues and students to come and talk. Yet, I do not hesitate to provide limits. That is our role too. This is why I added "if your professor does not have time, do not insist". And I am not against emails, too (but not too much, if words can be more effective.
@Laurent it's obvious that you're trying to be helpful, and in a different context your suggestions may be appropriate, but the fundamental problem with your post, and the reason for the "interesting mix of positive and negative reactions", is that you're giving advice about a completely different thing than what was asked about. OP simply wanted to know if it was appropriate to inform a professor about a paper he/she found, nothing less or more. Your advice reads much more into this question, making tons of unfounded, and very likely incorrect, assumptions. So... sorry, but I'm with the -1's.
@Dan Romik Would the OP have asked me the question (in private) "Would such an email generally be considered more of an annoyance, or acceptable?", I problably would have say: "Go ahead". Now, StackExchange is an open forum, and some Go Ahead answers were given before I could answer. Which made me think about providing a different type of answer. Don't be sorry, I just see a fundamental problem elsewhere
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.521326 | 2016-01-27T20:23:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62354",
"authors": [
"Bamboo",
"Basil Bourque",
"BlindKungFuMaster",
"Dan Romik",
"Federico Poloni",
"Jair Taylor",
"Laurent Duval",
"Patricia Shanahan",
"Raghu Parthasarathy",
"StrongBad",
"corsiKa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10220",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/173493",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/173512",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23035",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30897",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34357",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38057",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43138",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46322",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48329",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5640",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"mafu",
"s vys",
"sig_seg_v",
"testing93"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
80898 | Should a student be penalized for using a theorem outside of the curriculum?
I am taking an abstract algebra course and I am really interested about the topic. So much so that I spend most of my time reading supplementary materials. I consequently know a lot more theorems than the ones covered in class.
In a recent quiz, I used a theorem in one of my proofs that was not mentioned in the lecture since. My professor gave me partial marks for my answer for the reason that we didn't cover this theorem in class even though the proof was completely valid! I can't really see where he is coming from. How would someone be able to use a theorem correctly if he doesn't know its proof? I was quite baffled by his comment.
Do you agree with this?
EDIT: The professor just Emailed me and said that after thinking for a while, he decided to award me the full mark for the question. He also mentioned that he didn't want discourage me from studying the subject (since he saw most of my previous quiz grades were full marks) and I was passionate about it, but kindly requested that I include any proof for a theorem that I cite from now on in his exams. He also sent a broadcast message to the whole class indicating this.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
Nit-picky comment: "How would someone be able to use a theorem correctly if he doesn't know its proof?" This is extremely common in mathematics. 'Assume the Riemann hypothesis is true...'
This depends on what is announced in the syllabus and on the kind of test.
If the syllabus explicitly says that tests should be solved using the course material only, then, yes, any answer using anything else than course material is not totally correct and should get deductions. If the syllabus does not say so, the answer is not so clear anymore.
If the test is kind of a final exam on the whole course where the students are tested on the whole subject, than I (and this is a personal opinion) would not deduct anything if the proof is technically correct, whatever tools have been used (unless the problem says "solve this with this method"). However, in an intermediate test it may well be that the instructor wants the students to show that a certain technique can be applied or a certain concept can be used. Going beyond the course material spoils this idea and (again, personal opinion) one may deduct points, although it would be much better if these policy has been stated beforehand.
The above should answer the question "Why could points be deducted?" but not the "Should points be deducted?". I think the answer to the latter question is really opinion based (and may be a question for matheducators.stackexchange.com).
As a side remark on "How would someone be able to use a theorem correctly if he doesn't know its proof?" I (and I guess most other working mathematicians) do that all the time. I would not get anywhere without using theorems of which I haven't even dare to read to proof. Some examples from outside my field: People use Fermat's last theorem, the "Kepler conjecture" (also a theorem now), the four-color theorem, the "10,000 pages theorem" on the classification of finite simple groups, the Poincare conjecture (proven as special case of the geometrization theorem)…
Some people even use results that nobody knows how to prove.
Thanks for the answer. I didn't even know matheducators.stackexchange existed so thanks for the info. Also, I totally agree, if it was mentioned clearly before the exam, I would without a doubt have included the proof to avoid any problems.
There's also the possibility that OP did something like (for example) using the fundamental theorem of arithmetic to prove Euclid's lemma (which is not only pointless but circular, because a typical proof of FTA uses Euclid's lemma).
Sure, that's what I meant with "technically correct".
"If the syllabus explicitly says that tests should be solved using the course material only" - this is a position that will kill any education system (it already has?) It's the "no child gets ahead" solution to the "no child left behind"... use it long enough and the next generation of teachers won't know anything else.
I think that this is expected behavior, and that most professors would score it the same way.
A first point is this: As Landric says in a comment, the point of an exam is to assess mastery of basic knowledge covered in the course. If one uses a more powerful outside theorem, then the steps that they've skipped likely contained important concepts or techniques, that there is now no proof that the student has mastered. So the professor needs to ping the student to demonstrate those basic techniques before progressing.
A second point would be: Consider this to be modeling working within a particular tradition or development. Many mathematical textbooks and papers may be using competing (even contradictory) definitions, axioms, assumptions, etc. It's important to use only those results which are developed directly from that chain of reasoning. So in a sense this grading protocol tests the "focus" of the student, if they are aware of exactly what results are supported/in effect in the "field" represented by the course.
A third point (related to the preceding) is this: This tests your ability as an explainer/writer/teacher of future students. At any time, it's important that we detect and "dial in" in our explanations to the level of abstraction/knowledge possessed by the other human(s) in the transaction. If we cite some result or theorem completely outside and beyond the awareness of the other person, then it fails to serve as an illuminating explanation. We have an obligation to be aware of what the other person has developed, and keep our explanations in that context, so that they have a chance to truly understand. Write assignments as though the intended audience was another student in the same course.
Here's a programming anecdote that serves as an analogy, from a friend a few weeks ago: Professor gives an assignment to code a hashing function, or a basic search algorithm. Students routinely turn in work that's a single line long, calling the equivalent pre-existing library function that does that job. Obviously that's not what's expected, fails to show the low-level understanding desired, and is pretty comical if you think about it.
Maybe your case doesn't seem so egregious, because you saved just a few steps. But if the professor doesn't score in this way, that would always be the end result; one-line proofs citing some outside source, and failing to show mastery of the basic techniques.
R.Collins Referring to your programming anecdote,if that student wrote that library before, or showed in some way that he is capable of writing it, why wouldn't you allow him to use it? Maybe I get this wrong but the point of a course for me is to learn new things. If I have learn the intended thing, and even read more stuff, why should you stop a student from using it. The student wouldn't have understood that theorem if he didn't understand the basics would he? I don't think any student would go on searching for additional theorems until he understands the basic ones don't you think?
The exam or quiz is precisely the venue where the student proves that they are capable of using the basic techniques. Students look to outside sources to avoid doing basic work all the time.
@Coconut Courses are supposed to teach understanding, and mere citation does not demonstrate this, regardless of where the citation comes from. You say you've learned the intended thing. Great. How does your professor know this? Maybe you're in a study group, some other student found it, and now you all use it to shortcut half the proof. Graders wouldn't see this. The new requirement to include the proof is a very smooth move to elicit a demonstration of understanding. As far as the annoyance of writing five steps... it's a worthwhile trade-off for maintaining academic rigor.
@Coconut: if you prove the big theorem in your answer then you can use it. Unless the question explicitly demands a particular method that you don't use, of course, so watch for the difference between "hence prove..." and "hence, or otherwise, prove...". If it was just about what you've learned, examiners would have to accept "This part of the question is a lemma proved by Cauchy in 1843, QED". The point is not to learn what statements are true, it's to learn how to prove them. So pulling in a big theorem often is begging the question.
For that matter, suppose the question in complex analysis is "state and prove Cauchy's theorem for a triangle". Surely it's obvious that citing Cauchy's theorem for a closed curve is not a legitimate answer? Even without looking into the details of the course curriculum and the examination statutes of your institution, we can intuit that "know Cauchy's theorem" is not sufficient to meet the examination criteria.
A funny point: if I happen to prove a theorem large enough to cover the entire or most of the test, then what's the point of the test?
It depends. Consider these examples.
Suppose during an elementary calculus exam you a question asking you to prove that a given real polynomial of degree three has a root. A standard solution would be to use the intermediate value property. You could also use the fact that any real polynomial of odd degree has a root, and technically that would be a proof, but that would clearly not be a good solution -- the proof of that general fact is just a more abstract instance of the proof for a given polynomial of degree three. In fact, you could even use the general fact that every polynomial of degree three has a root. I hope you can see how that would be very far from being a solution.
For another example, suppose you had a class in elementary number theory, and you were asked to show that some diophantine equation has no solutions, but somehow you could reduce the equation to an instance of the Fermat's Last Theorem. Technically, you could just do the reduction and apply the theorem, but would that really be a good solution?
You could even think of a more extreme example: suppose you were asked to prove a given theorem during an exam (regardless of whether or not it was taught during the class in question). Would simply invoking the theorem and saying that the proof is completed be a good solution?
For a more subtle example, suppose you were to find the limit of sine of x over x at zero. You could try applying L'Hospital rule. This is not such an advanced theorem, but using it would still be wrong (as you need to know the derivative of sine to apply it, making the reasoning entirely circular).
The point is, at least during the introductory courses, you are mainly supposed to show how well you understand and apply basic concepts. Frequently, there may be an advanced theorem which would allow you to largely or completely avoid really using these elementary concepts, and you don't show that you understand them well. Moreover, this can allow you to do (possibly veiled) circular arguments.
On the other hand, if you use some more advanced concepts to circumvent a technical problem (or just to make a more beautiful proof), while still showing that you understand the underlying elementary ideas very well, you should not (in my opinion) be penalized. Similarly, if you use advanced ideas, but prove every step "from the ground up", I would say that penalizing you would be very wrong.
During more advanced courses as well as final exams, you are expected to have more broad knowledge and are much less likely to be penalized for using even somewhat advanced concepts. However, the same basic rules apply -- using the Fermat's Last Theorem would not be OK in my opinion, not even during an intermediate graduate number theory exam (unless explicitly allowed). It's mostly a matter of common sense.
Presumably using FLT could be implicitly allowed, if they ask a question that, you learned from the course, was an open question waiting for FLT? It's probably an error in the question: they should have said "show that FLT proves this". But hey ho, it's clear what they mean, so if you're fairly sure all known proofs use FLT then you have to go ahead.
The sin(x)/x example is very apt - I did this one myself, only trying to use the Taylor series expansion for sin(x)... in retrospect, not actually that convincing!
This is all hilarious and brings back memories.
In addition to sin(x)/x where the circularity is subtle (and depends a bit on your definitions of sine and pi), there’s the limit of x^2/x at 0 where L’Hop is obviously and undoubtedly circular.
@NoahSnyder: Sure, but using L'Hospital for x^2/x is just silly, and the correct solution is obvious. On the other hand, as AJK wrote, trying to use it for sin(x)/x is (I think) pretty common mistake (and the correct solution much less obvious -- unless you define sine by power series, but that's already pretty circular in the context of first year calculus).
The correct solution is obvious if you understand limits, but I'd happily bet that a substantial number of students would use L'Hopital's rule if you put lim_{x \rightarrow 0} x^2/x on a final exam. Lots of high school calculus teachers don't understand limits, and teach students that L'Hopital is the way to do them.
An important point to keep in mind here is that mathematical knowledge is largely contextual rather than being a collection of isolated facts that one learns in some arbitrary order. Consequently, when an exam question says "Prove assertion A", it is generally implicit that what this really means is "Prove assertion A in the context of the material discussed so far in the course" rather than "Prove assertion A, and you may use any result that ever appeared in the mathematical literature".
Note that in the former interpretation the question makes sense from the point of view of testing whether the student has learned not just why assertion A is true in some formal sense, but how this is relevant to the topic of the course and how it's related to the context in which assertion A is being discussed.
By contrast, the latter interpretation is highly problematic, since assertion A itself in all likelihood also appears in the mathematical literature, and it is obviously nonsensical to allow a proof that appeals to the result one is trying to prove. And if one does not allow that, should one allow a mild generalization of it? Should one allow a super-powerful theorem that implies it but that encapsulates thousands of pages of mathematical reasoning the student couldn't possibly have studied? And so on. So, in my mind, a student who assumes this interpretation will have demonstrated that they fail to grasp this important issue of context and/or are trying to get away with their ignorance of the specific ideas and techniques discussed in the course by appealing to some external knowledge they happen to possess. The fact that they possess such knowledge may be impressive and worth rewarding, or it may not be - that depends on the specifics of the case, so depending on those specifics I can see it being reasonable to deduct points in some cases, or being more sensible to award the full points for the question in other cases.
A point that is frequently missed by students is that, in a course, in addition to the syllabus, there are frequently a number of implicit assumptions. Whether these implicit assumptions are significant or not, depends on the professor.
These assumptions are related, for example, to the methods that are to be employed to solve certain exercises, to which theorems the student is allowed to use, to what should be assumed in case of missing data, to which models should be employed for certain devices, etc.
Usually, students unconsciously learn these assumptions from the lectures and the exercise sessions.
Failing to comply with these implicit assumptions might result in a lower grade.
For instance, when I was a student of electronic engineering, one of the main courses during the first year was that of circuit theory. When I took the exam, one of the exercises was about the transient response of a first-order circuit. There is a standard method to solve these kind of circuits, but I decided to use the Laplace transform.
When the exam committee hand us back the papers, I found that they awarded me half marks on that problem, and there was the following comment: "The student doesn't know how to solve first-order circuits".
Of course I knew it! I simply decided to use another, correct, method, because I judged that in that particular case, for me, using Laplace transform was quicker. Thus, I complained with the committee: "This statement is false!". They looked at the paper and said: "You shoot a bird with a cannon, you deserve half marks". That's it, the implicit assumptions was: "you shouldn't use a method other than the standard one".
Given your last edit, it's nice that your professor decided to award you full marks, but for the next time, beware the implicit assumptions.
"... in a course, in addition to the syllabus, there are frequently a number of implicit assumptions...:" If a student should be penalized for using information that isn't explicitly taught within that course's syllabus, then (by your own reasoning) these "implicit assumptions" need to be spelled out in the course. You can't have it both ways.
I agree with this answer. Interesting to reflect on the fact that the professor's never had to deal with this issue prior in his career (i.e., the implicit assumptions were understood by all other students), and it sounds likely that this requirement will get added verbiage on his syllabus in the future (as preferred by Dirk above).
I went for double-kills on my AP physics I exam, writing both the standard method and more unorthodox methods whenever I could. By the time I told my teacher, he was almost crying, but it turns out I got a 5 on the exam. I have to wonder what the grader thought.
There is mention on this page of "implicit assumptions" that only material taught in a course should be used in the examinations for that course. But there are enough counter-opinions on this page to show that standard is not universally agreed upon. There are equal reasons to assume that any mathematically valid methods are fair game. Perhaps the student had experiences in the past where he or she was rewarded for thinking outside of the box or for studying more than they had to. Is that really an outlandish possibility? Is that really such a bad thing? How would they know what this particular professor finds acceptable?
Think about the classic story of Gauss adding the numbers 1 through 100. Has that story EVER been recounted in a way that suggested he should have been penalized for not using the laborious method expected of him?
If a professor wants a student to use a particular method for a proof, then that needs to be made explicit. Students can't be mind readers. (And even if they were, they couldn't use that information anyway unless mind reading was explicitly taught in the course.)
I feel like you conflate "a method of proof not taught in the course" with "invoking (without proof) a theorem not covered in the course". The student appealed to a certain theorem that was not covered in the course and did not mention the proof. I think we all agree that if the student had given the proof of the theorem, he would have been golden. In fact that's what his instructor told him to do for the future (while being generous in response to an isolated incident). Others have explained well why "You can use any theorem from the literature in an exam" is certainly not tenable.
If Gauss had written down (in German) "the nth triangular number is equal to n(n+1)/2, so the solution is 5050" then possibly he should have been penalised under exam conditions. Certainly he should be if he'd written down "I happen to know the answer: it's 5050". Either the formula or the specific result for n=100 could be cited from the literature, but the question is not "cite the result from literature", so even if he'd cited correctly he still fails.
However, if he applies a particular method in the special case of n=100 (which I think is how the story's usually told: he offered that 1 + 2 + ... + 99 + 100 and 100 + 99 + ... + 2 + 1 can be summed in a clever way), then we assign credit according to whether or not he justifies his method. What he can't do, under exam conditions, is use citation in place of proof.
These implicit assumptions might be relevant in a course that is specifically on social skills where observing, analyzing, and using implicit assumptions is a key skill. Math, however, is not a social skill. Your point about the famous Gauss incident is great, and one of the finest examples of the OP's concept in action.
@RobertColumbia: Apparently then it is a social skill, since you can fail it if you lack sufficient observation and analysis to understand what an examination question is asking you to do. If it helps to understand why this is, one can distinguish "doing mathematics" from "convincing the examiners that you meet the criteria to pass". IMO this question is about the latter.
There's actually quite a rich field of thought that mathematics is, in fact, a social explaining-convincing skill. Consider this quote from Cantor Medal winner Yuri Manin: "A proof only becomes a proof after the social act of 'accepting it as a proof'." Quoted here: https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/08/09/issues-in-the-proof-that-p%E2%89%A0np/ Or this blog post by Dick Lipton: https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2013/07/14/surely-you-are-joking/
Penalized? No. But it's reasonable that you be required to prove or solve problems using the material you've studied rather than a "5 kg hammer" that you found lying around in some book.
Remember the professor wants to help you familiarize yourself with the subject of that course; the exam is just a means to that end - it's not supposed to be a test of how good/intelligent/knowledgeable you are in general.
No. You shouldn't be penalized. The professor should applaud your understanding of the subject. That said, in school you should make a habit of answering questions the way a teacher wants them to be answered. Otherwise you'll have to deal with issues like this.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.522127 | 2016-12-02T14:38:23 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/80898",
"authors": [
"AJK",
"Adrian Colomitchi",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"Dirk",
"Jeutnarg",
"Kevin",
"Noah Snyder",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Robert Columbia",
"Simply Beautiful Art",
"Steve Jessop",
"Syntax Junkie",
"T. Verron",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11251",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26631",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4474",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51636",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/529",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56720",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/61632",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65728",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65762",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9892",
"rhombidodecahedron",
"tomasz",
"user3508551"
],
"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
} |
51828 | How many referees is too many for a journal or conference paper submission?
I recently reviewed a paper for a Math/Comp-Sci conference. The author's response came back with responses to 12 referees.
Am I wrong in thinking it absurd that there are this many referees on a paper?
For one, I, like many researchers, expect a paper to have about 2-3 referees, so make a rule of refereeing about this many papers for every paper I publish. I will cannot referee 12 papers for ever paper I publish. What does this do to the referee pool?
Secondly, having so many referees seems to make the decision of any single referee as insignificant. If I spend 2 days on a paper, as is not uncommon in math, I would like to think my opinion counts for more than one vote in 12.
Finally, responding to 12 referees is quite a burden for the author; especially if referees make suggestions about style or presentation, which could be contradictory.
I am not just ranting. Is there another side to this that I am missing?
I'd think that there's indeed something weird going on in that situation... It is true that, apparently, the contemporary game-ish version of many academic pursuits-of-better-understanding-for-humans is completely lost, etc. You've gotta "deconstruct" what's going on, ... since, I'd sadly claim, a naive appraisal of the situation would wildly disserve you...
I think it would be worth asking the editor what is going on.
I'm not in a position to judge anything, but is it possible that the editor sends requests to more-than-required number of referees due to usually low turnover rate?
Is is a respected journal? Isn't it possible that the journal itself is a scam?
What did the editor / conference panel chair say when you asked them?
I think you should probably be reviewing more. Many papers are rejected and never published. Also many papers submitted to conferences/journals will be written by scientists who are not (yet) capable of reviewing a paper competently. If you are competent to review papers, then you also need to take these factors into account and hence review at least 5-6 times as many papers as you publish. Perhaps that would make a good question by itself? I'd agree though that 12 reviewers is excessive and suspicious. I also feel very sorry for any author having to respond to 12 reviews!
Thanks for your comments. The journal was a conference proceedings, and was asking for reports in 15 days. So very possibly they were expecting a low turnover. I originally checked the conference out to get a feel for what should be accepted to it. It wasn't a high profile conference, but it did seem legitimate.
Also, about asking the editor, I didn't ask originally. I just wrote back that I don't want to make reviews for them. But you are right. I have now asked for an explanation.
I fully agree that 12 referees is too many. 2 to max 4 referees is fine. More referees will indeed leave the authors with conflicting comments, and does not contribute to the quality of the review.
Having 12 referees is both unusual and a ridiculous amount to have. The most I have ever seen is 5 on a single paper and even then I thought that was pushing it. As @Danny Ruijters mentioned having 2-4 referees is a good number.
I don't see a reason why there would be a need for 12 referees and, if possible, it may be interesting to talk to the author about their opinion with 12 referees is.
Having that may referees will dilute the opinion of any one of them. Like you said having a 1 in 12 vote isn't the same as a 1 in 2 or 1 in 4.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.524025 | 2015-08-19T23:52:13 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/51828",
"authors": [
"410 gone",
"Chris Plaza",
"Dikran Marsupial",
"Ettina Kitten",
"Fyrooz Mohammed Saeed",
"Mitchely",
"Nate Eldredge",
"anton belichenko",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142638",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142639",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142640",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142641",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142645",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2827",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38828",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"justhalf",
"mhsiggers",
"paul garrett",
"sammac",
"yo'"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
41425 | What to do when professor is not responding to emails or calls and his action is required to commence a masters thesis?
I'm planning to start my master thesis soon. It will be an external thesis in a company.
As this kind of thesis is not very common in German universities, I need to find a professor to supervise me during the whole semester.
Luckily, a professor agreed to supervise me and advised me to meet with one of his PhD students to discuss my task, whether it meets all requirements.
We met the following day. Afterwards, I sent my professor an email to arrange a meeting to clarify some things and get his final OK.
As he hadn't responded for about a week, I sent a reminder. This time he answered, we met and discussed more things. He even suggested to call my boss to clarify my task, so that I don't need to "liaise" between them.
After talking to my boss, I sent my professor another email with times, my boss is available for the call.
This email remained unanswered for another week, as well. I wasn't sure how to react, so I contacted my professor's secretary. She told me to send him another reminder, also she would talk to him.
He answered me a few days later and promised, to call my boss during the following 2 days.
Unfortunately, he didn't.
I'm in an awkward situation now. My boss asks me regularly about my professor, because I can't officially start my thesis before we have his OK. I'm waiting for about a month now.
The phone call between them wouldn't last more than 10 minutes and all the little issues about my thesis would be resolved.
His secretary said, this behaviour is very uncommon. Also, I never had any problems with this particular professor.
Could you ask the secretary about the times the professor is usually in his office and then ask your boss to give your professor a call? Might be easier that way around.
You didn't really ask a clear question but I will answer the implied question: "How would you handle this situation?"
My experience with emails and professors is they are hit and miss. For some this is a very reliable method of communication, for others it is not. This isn't necessarily generational since quite often universities give young professors a new email address which becomes just one more thing they must monitor. In addition, as the semester progresses, most professors' inboxes become flooded with student email along with the usual administrative junk mail.
My suggestion would be find some way, phone call, in person visit or "ambush" outside of a regularly scheduled class. Once you find a way to make contact, explain your predicament with your boss and ask if there is a better method of communication. If the reply is "just use email" then explain this has proven unreliable and if you are to continue with the collaboration you need another method.
Bottom line is this is a collaboration. If you are unable to collaborate, you will not finish your research and you will damage your reputation at your job. If the professor is unable to communicate in a manner supporting the collaboration, you need to find a different professor of find a different thesis.
Not everyone does well with emails. Quite frequently I had to remind my supervisor that I had emailed him, and he would look embarrassed and find my email, and then be happy to talk to me for well over two hours, cancelling any other meetings he had.
I remember once I said to him, "So many unread emails? GMail now has some 'Important' filter that picks out those that are important so you don't see the unimportant ones immediately"
His reply was, "Yes I am using that, it is very effective, as you can see today I have only had 394 important emails. Maybe I will read a few of them." [and this was not a sarcastic remark!]
After that I would see him in person or telephone him if I needed anything urgently.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.524364 | 2015-03-10T18:45:32 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41425",
"authors": [
"Ben10",
"Eric Vansteenberghe",
"Ewa Szyszka",
"James Powell",
"Sumyrda - remember Monica",
"blackboxlogic",
"hemal7735",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111773",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111774",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111775",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111988",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112049",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112090",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112091",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13138",
"seniorbenelli"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
41052 | What does "Awaiting Reviewer Scores" mean within the context of a ScholarOne submission system?
I submitted a paper to a Taylor and Francis journal that uses the ScholarOne submission system. The manuscript status has changed from "Under Review" to "Awaiting Reviewer Scores".
What does this change mean?
What is the flow chart of the different statuses for a manuscript?
With a typical ScholarOne configuration, "Awaiting Reviewer Scores" means that it is actually out with (at least some) reviewers, while "Under Review" would instead mean the previous stage, where it is being considered by the handling editor(s) and might still be rejected without review.
After the review scores come back, a manuscript then returns to the handling editor for a recommendation, and thence up to the chief editor(s) for a decision.
"Under Review" should be de-ambiguised to "Under Editorial Review"
I have found a tutorial for Editors for Oxford journals. I think, this slide explains it all.
What does "MSs" stand for?
@TrungDung "MS" is an abbreviation for "manuscript," so "MSs" would be "manuscripts."
None of the answers above are accurate at least in my scenario. I had a revision decision, and after I submitted the revision, the status went to "Under review", and after about 4 weeks, it has now changed to "Awaiting reviewer scores". In this case, the reviewers were already lined up to get the revision, and so it doesn't make sense for "awaiting reviewer scores" to just mean that the reviewing is in progress -- in fact, it's "under review" that means that, and it doesn't make sense for "under review" to mean pre-screening. What the "awaiting reviewer scores" most plausibly means here is that the reviews are now due! 4 weeks is also the time I'd expect the AE to allot for the reviewers (from past experience), and so the timing is right for the status to change from "Under review" to "Awaiting reviewer scores" - so it just means some reviewers haven't yet submitted it and the reviews are either due or overdue. This explanation also makes sense if you just look at the English of the status "Under review" and "Awaiting reviewer scores" -- the scores aren't awaited unless it's due! It's probably why they chose this language for the status message. In addition, for all my submissions in the past, the "Under review" status has always meant that the paper was actually with the reviewers as opposed to with the AE waiting for the assignment; papers have been in the "Under review" status for me for several months after which they change to "Awaiting AE recommendation". So it makes no sense that "Under review" means pre-screening (as suggested by one of the comments) - it may be different for different journals but I doubt that is the case for any journal.
"Awaiting Reviewer Scores" means that the paper has been assigned the minimum amount of reviewers that the Associate Editor has set for the manuscript. The minimum would be either two or three depending on the publication but the associate editor might have sent a few more invitations around. "Under Review" means that reviewers have been selected and invitations have been sent out but some of them have not responded yet or some of them have rejected the invitation and the editorial board is still looking for reviewers.
I also think that it is up to the specific settings of each journal to show the different status of the review process. In some you can see "Under Review", "Awaiting Associate Editor Recommendation", "Awaiting EIC decision" etc but in others you just see "Under review" for the whole process.
It seems the term "Under Review" is named ambiguously, which is what causes the confusion.
Yes, Indeed mine is undergoing the same process as we speak. under review basically means that your manuscript is still with the handling editor and is being reviewed if instructions were followed, thus fit enough to be sent to blind reviewers. Awaiting reviewer score, it has been sent out to selected reviewers and is still awaiting for their scores (comments).
Awaiting reviewers scores simply mean the article is with the reviewers and the journal office is waiting for the comments.
Under review also can mean that the article is being considered by the science editor for technical and English language check or it is with the subject editor and he is evaluating it for external review, or the article is with the reviewer for evaluation.
So, the former (Awaiting reviewers scores) is a direct statement that the article is with the reviewers.
You said "Awaiting reviewers ... the article is with the reviewers ..." and "Under review ... the article is with the reviewer for evaluation.". Would you make it more clear?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.524753 | 2015-03-05T03:16:29 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41052",
"authors": [
"Aditya Prakash",
"Arakel",
"Atemi",
"Dmitri Zaitsev",
"Emma Bick",
"Mehmet Ban",
"Nobody",
"Pradeep kumar Mahato",
"Srishti Mishra",
"Suyash Kumar",
"TeacherOfMathEnglish",
"TrungDung",
"Zoe Desvl",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/106689",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110642",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110644",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110647",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110648",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110661",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110664",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110676",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115776",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/144511",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/148567",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166200",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209794",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9780",
"jsarbour",
"shoover",
"user110647",
"user110661"
],
"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
} |
100345 | If a paper is rejected by many journals before finally being published, will that cause conflict with the reviewers who rejected the manuscript?
I had a manuscript written 3 years before. The results of the manuscript was obtained accidentally while doing some easy trial methods. Although the results were very interesting, but the method was very very simple. So I thought to publish it in a low impact journal to increase my number of publications. But things went very opposite and got rejected in 5 journals. Everyone were commenting that the method is very simple and may introduce the unknown errors to the estimations or computations.
As no one was commenting other than the methods, so I had no way to modify anything. Very bad thing is that none of the journal took less than 4-6 months to take the first decision and my manuscript remained unaccepted for two years and half.
Finally I thought to submit it to a high impact journal. Very surprisingly, the reviewers appreciated the simple method used and accepted the manuscript with a major revision to highlight few other things.
My accepted manuscript highlights the same methodology which was rejected by 5 other journals.
Will there be any conflict or issues when those reviewers (who rejected my manuscript) see my accepted paper after final publication?
Your referees at specialist journals said, basically, "These methods aren't good enough to answer these questions, because X." But the generalist high-impact journal may have looked more at the results than the methods.
If X is "we just don't think this is very sophisticated, and the tools are out of fashion," I suspect nothing will happen.
If X is "there are uncontrolled errors larger than your effect," and you haven't explained in your paper why that isn't true, someone might write a comment on your paper. This comment will look a lot like your earlier referee reports. The field will then decide who is right. (See, e.g. the "arsenic life" experiment for a recent high-profile example.)
Beyond this, if I saw the second case from a paper I refereed, and there was no attempt from the authors to address the points I raised, I would not be happy with the authors, and might be less likely to extend them the benefit of the doubt in future referee reports.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.525168 | 2017-12-12T03:17:10 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100345",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
34566 | Do I need to mention having survived a life-threatening illness when applying for a new academic position?
Do I have to (or is it wise or unwise) to mention having survived a life-threatening illness (such as cancer, a (early) heart attack, etc when applying for a new (non-leading) academic position?
Assume that my health condition is now good enough (and the past health troubles are not obvious from my outward appearance) such that from a medical point of view nothing speaks against my further persuing my academic career and interests.
Nevertheless, due the specific medicaments I have to take for the rest of my life and some remnants of the past health issues, there might be times my productivity might slightly be lessened. Also, even though the probability is not very high, it can in principle not be 100% excluded that the illness will come back at some point.
Of course I would not mention this in a written application, but should I talk about my health condition in the context of an interview or before things are getting serious and it comes to signing the contract?
BTW I currently live in Germany
If you think it helps explain a work or productivity gap in your career, I would mention it and I would do so in writing rather than let your prospective employers speculate. Because overcoming a major medical challenge can help you align your priorities and strengthen you in other ways, doing so can definitely be done in a way that leads one to conclude that it is a strength, not a weakness, of your candidacy.
If your previous condition is not relevant in these ways, I don't think you have any obligation to bring it up. Sure, your illness might return but nobody is 100% immune from serious illness impacting their ability to work or be productive. For that matter, severe chronic illnesses that unambiguously affect productivity (e.g., cramps, migraines, etc.) are simply not the kind of thing that people bring up while interviewing and candidates have no responsibility to do so.
Reminding prospective employers of this can open to the door to (illegal) discrimination based on your medical history and I don't think you are helping either yourself or your prospective employers by bringing it up. When you take an offer, it might be good to let your future department know about your history as background but you might even let this just be raised socially.
Good answer. One other point is that you may want to carefully study your prospective employer's insurance, medical leave, and disability policies. For an institution like a university, sometimes these are publicly posted; otherwise you could contact someone in the human resources office and ask any questions you have. As far as I know, they would not have any reason to tell the hiring committee you were asking, so it shouldn't affect the interview process in any way.
As @NateEldredge notes, it's imperative to look at the insurance/benefits situation. In particular, there still remains the possibility that insurance refuses to cover "pre-existing conditions" of certain sorts. This should not be the case for academic situations, but one should look carefully.
@NateEldredge However, this is relevant only to some countries (U.S. for sure, I dunno about others), and it is irrelevant for most European countries (where the health insurance is government-based and not company-based).
@yo' Or in the case of some countries where they have free health care (which you could argue is government based, but technically it's not really insurance in the normal sense)
If you live in the United States, you are not obligated to provide any information pertinent to disability, including life-threatening illness.
What with competition for jobs being so fierce, you may find yourself
overtly or covertly discriminated against in favour of someone who is
healthier. That's why the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed
into law. Any questions regarding your health from an employer are
also illegal, so you are not obligated to answer.
The asker did not specify that they live in the US - your country-specific information may not be of any use to them. It's still good advice, but it's too specific without first confirming which country's laws apply to the asker.
from what I understand, protections in Canada, France and the UK are even stronger than the US.
Yes, but you're still making assumptions about where the asker lives, they might live somewhere where such discrimination is not only legal but socially acceptable. I know it's unlikely, but it's still possible, you should always ask rather than make assumptions.
@Pharap nah I am not in the US, but the information is a good one to have anyway as (who knows?) maybe at some point I will be there and others already are.
@Pharap, even if I am making assumptions, I believe the OP is still not morally obligated to disclose. No deceit is present because I do not consider it dishonest to lie to a tyrant, which companies outside US jurisdiction who would discriminate about it amount to.
@Dilaton Since employment and discrimination law does vary so much from country to country, it would be helpful if you would edit the question to say where you are.
@DavidRicherby This is kind of my point. Instead of making assumptions, it's much easier to simply ask the OP which laws apply to them.
@Dilaton I admitted in my very first comment the advice was good advice, I just think it's bad practice to assume the OP of any question on the stack exchange is from a certain country - especially when laws come into play.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.525522 | 2014-12-19T18:46:25 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34566",
"authors": [
"Askar Sabiq",
"BMK_83",
"David Richerby",
"Dilaton",
"FissionChips",
"LookIntoEast",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Pharap",
"Prof. Taher Badinjki",
"eternalsquire",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10582",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26838",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5904",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94804",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94805",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94806",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94810",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94847",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94921",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94963",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96932",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett",
"unknown",
"user94847",
"user94963",
"yo'"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
23219 | What to do when paper is deemed in scope for the conference but not for the proceedings?
I submitted a paper to a conference. I wasn't quite sure if my paper was within the scope of that conference (it seemed a judgement call), but it was accepted. I went to the conference, and after attending several of the talks, I felt my paper was actually a good fit after all. My presentation of the paper went well; lots of people were interested in the topic and asked good questions. I was reasonably confident that my paper would be accepted for publication in the proceedings.
All student papers received an extra round of feedback before the formal submission for publication in the proceedings. I just received my feedback; the reviewer was very complimentary, but said that the topic was not within the scope of the conference.
So now I'm not sure what to do. Making the paper fit the scope better won't really be practical; I already did the best I could in that direction. The formal submission is due in about a month. I believe it's a good paper, so I could probably find a home for it elsewhere. I have two questions.
Should I formally submit the paper as-is. Would it be better to simply try to find a more appropriate place to publish? Or should I just consider it a lesson learned, forget about this paper, and move on to the next one.
Is there something I could have done up front to establish whether the paper was in scope or not? Perhaps in future it would be better to only submit to conferences where it's very clear that the paper is a good fit. This issue is likely to arise again for me, because my research is sort of at the boundary of two fields.
Should I formally submit the paper as-is. Would it be better to simply
try to find a more appropriate place to publish? Or should I just
consider it a lesson learned, forget about this paper, and move on to
the next one.
In academia, you have to fight for papers you believe. Reviewers can vary wildly in their assessments, and their assessments can be wrong. Ultimately, if you feel that this is an appropriate place to publish, I think it's worth submitting it anyway and rolling the dice. I have two caveats:
If possible, ask a third party in your field whom you respect about their opinion of the paper.
Think hard about why you think the paper belongs in the proceedings and, if possible, add a clear motivation to the text.
Is there something I could have done up front to establish whether the
paper was in scope or not? Perhaps in future it would be better to
only submit to conferences where it's very clear that the paper is a
good fit. This issue is likely to arise again for me, because my
research is sort of at the boundary of two fields.
In general, you can write to people on the technical program committee of the conference (or the chair of that committee) with a brief explanation of your work and a request for an assessment of suitability. It is important not to get discouraged from rejections ... they are common, sometimes for good reasons and other times for utterly stupid reasons. The key is to learn what you can from the reviews, improve the paper, and resubmit where appropriate.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.525996 | 2014-06-10T22:59:52 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23219",
"authors": [
"Ale C",
"Max",
"Nikola Janicijevic",
"Steve",
"WonderWorker",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62064",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62065",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62066",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62070",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62096"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
63580 | Can editors review a manuscript and make a decision if they cannot find any reviewers?
I had submitted a manuscript to an International Journal few months before. It is already 5 months. But the status is still showing "under review". Since it is getting late, so I contacted to the Journal stating the current status. I got a reply that they have contacted a number of reviewers, but no one shows interest to review it. At present they have sent the manuscript to the editor.
So whether an Editor can reject it most probably? or can review my manuscript to make a proper decision?
The editor certainly has the power to reject an article without having it reviewed. If they can't find a suitable reviewer, this is probably what would happen, unfortunately for you.
In some cases the editor might have the authority to accept it without an outside review, but this would depend on the policies of the specific journal. Anyway, if they were planning to do this, they probably would have already done it.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.526242 | 2016-02-18T05:49:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63580",
"authors": [
"Elvis",
"Fina Sabirah Radwa",
"Lizeth Garcia",
"XaniaY",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178146",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178147",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178148",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/178152",
"uwu spam bad boy uwu"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
42141 | How to balance trying hard in a Master's program with stress of working too hard and not having a life?
I have a nice problem but it's making me miserable.
My background is in visual communication and I'm used to getting regular feedback as well as seeing what my classmates are up to. Also, the grades we would get back then didn't really matter but the quality of the work was what would land us a job later so I'm always concerned with the quality of what I'm doing. Also, this sometimes makes me feel like I'm starting with a handicap as I'm not used to writing papers and English is not my first language.
Ever since I joined a Master's program in a different field, I can't seem to set reasonable expectations for myself (or align my expectations to the ones for the course). As I work on a project, I keep finding holes and making it better until I'm satisfied. Since there is little feedback and that I don't know what my classmates are doing, I just do my best or as close as I'm able to. The nice part is that sometimes the work ends up having potential for publication, I get a nice GPA and the esteem of my teachers. The not-so-good part is that I just don't have a life until school is over and my stress is really ramping up. The obvious solution would be to not try so hard but that seems like a waste of an education.
Any advice?
You should ask the faculty for more feedback. How your peers are doing does not really matter much. Since this is Academia, I do not think we are going to tell you to work less.
Emillie,
I to struggle with the same issues. I am working on my Masters as well. I have a few handicaps that make my life a bit difficult when trying to do my best. When I ask my professors questions, I get, Keep up the good work, if you require more time, let me know. Never the answer to what I am actually asking for. Anyways, I strive for one day at time. I keep my head up and continue to find enjoyment in small things, to keep my head from exploding on the larger things.
Remember why you started what your doing now. Pull your energy from your roots/background. And focus on why you want to do what your doing! What is your end game?
Try to get some exercise, specifically cardiovascular.
Then start to eat the elephant again, one bite at a time.
There are those who don't want you to succeed, and strive on seeing you fail, because that is one less person in the pool or class. When you do finish, and you will, keep that in mind! Be a motivator!
Good Luck,
Ron
This is a situation that you simply cannot balance without making some changes to your lifestyle. The most important point is to take breaks, and not to feel guilty for doing so.
The other answerers have good suggestions on productive ways to spend break time, but there are less productive ways as well. Go to parties or bars, have a few drinks. Go on holiday. Join a board game club. Some people just need other people, and if you're that sort of person then it can eat at you from the inside if you spend all your time working in solitude.
If you are the sort of person who can stick to a well-defined schedule, then I would suggest scheduling your leisure activities well in advance, and try to keep to a routine that you do not break unless it's really necessary.
Lastly, give yourself at least one day in the weekend where you do not work unless you're super-motivated, genuinely want to get something done, and have no personal things that need doing.
+1 for "it can eat at you from the inside if you spend all your time working in solitude".
Great answer by Ron. I have some additional specific suggestions for you.
What you are suffering from is sometimes called school anxiety. Practice telling people that you are suffering from school anxiety, so it will roll off your tongue without causing you distress. Then you'll be ready to talk to your professors about it. Make a special appointment with each one. If it's easier to bring a friend or a representative of the Disability Services office with you, for moral support, go ahead.
In the appointment, tell the professor calmly that you have been suffering from school anxiety. Hopefully at that point the professor will jump in and ask, "Is there anything I can do to support you?" If not, that's okay, you can just start talking about things s/he can do to support you. Specifically, what I have in mind is for you to send the professor a draft before you feel finished, for feedback. This kind of hand-holding can help prevent anxious over-editing.
Also, you should be working with the college Writing Center. That will also help prevent over-editing, and it will help get you out of your isolation.
The other thing you can do in that last regard is to interact more with classmates and department mates. Try to find a study partner or study group. Look for notices on bulletin boards about Friday volleyball. If there aren't any, put one up yourself. (Volleyball was just an example, of course.)
It's fine to be meticulous and hard-working, but when you see the editing making you miserable, that's a red flag, and it's time to build in more support for yourself.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.526392 | 2015-03-22T21:34:06 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42141",
"authors": [
"Alexandros",
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Bob Kuhar",
"Bruhat",
"DongNaiReview",
"Gautam Kumar",
"Prem Sylvester",
"Sundararajan C",
"Vinícius Lopes Simões",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10042",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/113939",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/113940",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/113941",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123904",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123965",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123986",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123987",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123996",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"malloc"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
13151 | Should each substantive chapter of a PhD dissertation be of similar length?
A professor told me once that the chapter sizes (measured in number of pages) in a PhD dissertation should be coherent. That is, the number of pages in each chapter should be somehow close to each other (to the average). Note: This does not include the Introduction and Conclusion chapters.
Is this really an important factor when writing a dissertation?
It's just a general guideline, don't worry about it too much. Aside from the fact that there are many ways to lay out a thesis, there are many reasons this would be violated. I would venture that a better way to state this rule would be, "A chapter should be of medium length." If a given chapter is too short, it's likely an indicator that it can be combined with some other section. If a single chapter is too long, split it up into parts (experiment 1, exp 2, discussion, etc).
In any event, you should first check into how your advisor wants the thesis laid out. Consider asking your advisor to see some dissertations of other previous students to get a feel for how he likes to have things laid out; that'll be a good way to get a feel for how to lay out your own.
I believe this is a general rule for any book, not just a thesis.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.526827 | 2013-10-02T16:23:39 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13151",
"authors": [
"Anderson Fraga",
"Jen",
"Jonathan E. Landrum",
"Miller",
"Yebbis Dubbis",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33554",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33555",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33557",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33572",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7134"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
37212 | Should you place accents on letters in academic writing in English?
Is there a standard practice in academic writing regarding the use of accented letters when the underlying language is English? I'm specifically thinking of the word naive, which often has a dieresis above the i, but I suppose this is applicable to other words.
I would prefer to not use them since it's simpler and seems somehow less pretentious to me.
Also, is there is a difference between dissertations and journal articles?
As far as I know, there are many style guides and dictionaries that does not recommend using these accents. Thus, you are free not to use them in whatever you publish yourself and have the copy editor worry about it everywhere else.
@Wrzlprmft: Many style guides and dictionaries that do not recommend using accents?! Can you cite a few of them, please? Moreover, in languages which use accented letters, removing an accent can completely change the meaning of a word: e.g., in French, à is a preposition, but a is a verb. Do you really want to be misunderstood? Or being considered sloppy? By the way, BMS, modern typesetting systems allow you to write accented letters without many difficulties: how many times do you want to write naïve in an academic paper?
@MassimoOrtolano: Merriam Webster: naive, cliche, Gaussian. Moreöver, this question is explicitly about the English language. I am far from dropping recommending diacritics in other languages (I have once taken some effort to have a Romanian author’s name spelt with ș instead of ş in a citation), I am not even recommending anything regarding English, just reporting.
@MassimoOrtolano I'm in physics, and I type Schrodinger often.
It's perfectly correct in English to just write "naive". But it's good manners to include accents in peoples' names, at least when these people do so on their own papers.
@BMS: I thought your question was about the English language and not about proper names?
@BMS: The letter o with umlaut can be replaced by the digraph oe, so you can write Schroedinger instead of Schrodinger (see e.g. this discussion on German.SE).
@MassimoOrtolano: But only if it’s impossible to use ö, which, as you correctly remarked earlier, rarely is the case nowadays.
I am fine with that level of "pretentiousness". I feel using letters beyond the scope of unaccented a..z in a published document is just as "pretentious" as using capitals in a text message or an instant messenging message. It's not something extra that you add to stand out, it's something normal that you keep doing, even though many others might be too lazy.
How is this question specific to academia? Does it seem likely to you that academia would have different standard spellings to any other branch of formal English usage? Why would you spell naïve differently in an academic paper to how you'd spell it elsewhere?
@TRiG: Academia has its own conventions and rules for its proper type of documents, such as papers and other types of publications. Questions about these conventions are fully on-topic. Other types of documents may have different target audiences and goals, so I can imagine that a commercial product description would favour a "flashy, modern" way of spelling that conveys "simplicity" over a "precise" way of spelling that conveys "thoroughness", as it may be found in academic papers.
@MassimoOrtolano: While Schroedinger is better than Schrodinger, I'm sure the man would have been very much angered if you used either instead of Schrödinger. There are also cases where different names are possible, like Müller and Mueller, and changing the first one would destroy the distinction.
I believe naïve is more common in the UK, while naive is more common in the US. Asking about "English" may not get you a useful answer.
@NajibIdrissi: The use of diaereses is hardly unique to French; English uses the same mark for the same purpose in words like "cöoperation" and "cöop". Even though such words are often written "cooperation" and "co-op" [the hyphen being necessary, in at least some contexts, to distinguish it from a dwelling for birds] I would consider the use of a diaeresis to indicate that "naïve" is two syllables to be perfectly reasonable in English.
@NajibIdrissi Words like jail, ail, fail, mail, and so on, do use the combination.
@NajibIdrissi: ai is typically a dipthong, which (at least) in English isn't considered two syllables. It's not pronounced the same in "bait" as it is in "naive", but fortunately English doesn't give a flying fairy about phonetic spelling, so there's no need for decoration to distinguish the different sounds of cough, bough, bought, through, though, hiccough, rough. You just learn 'em ;-)
Anyway, I don't think this question is, in the end, specific to academia. All the comments and answers seem to boil down to just whether "naive" with that spelling is or is not an admissible English word, with no reference to it being any more or less admissible in academia than any other formal writing. And of course the note that academics are courteous people who try to represent names correctly for their original language/orthography, which while true is irrelevant to the question about cases where the underlying language is English :-)
@supercat The diaeresis indicates the start of the next syllable, so it's "coöperation", not "cöoperation".
@hvd: Mea culpa. Actually, the typography I've seen which I prefer would center the diaeresis between the two letters, but I don't know if there's any nice way to render that in Unicode.
Please take extended discussion to [chat].
@Anonymous your comment, if pasted as an answer, would be the only reasonable one so far.
Do you like reading papers with misspelled words, grammar errors, uncertain syntax, badly formatted equations, unreadable graphs and unclear pictures? Probably not.
Modern typesetting systems and careful proofreading allow writers to avoid, as much as possible, the above unpleasantnesses and, moreover, allow them to typeset all sort of characters. Furthermore, macros and shortcuts can be defined for quickly repeating difficult words. Thus, with modern typesetting systems there's really no excuse for not using diacritical marks, regardless of practices which date back to an epoch when typesetting systems were not as flexible as modern ones.
Academic papers and books are not only read by native English speakers, but by people from all over the world, where a missing accent can be cause of confusion or, in case of many missing accents, considered a sign of sloppiness (which typically does not put the reader in a favourable mood), especially if the accent is missing from a proper name.
This is perhaps a bit harsh with respect to words like 'naive' for which diacritical marks are not strictly necessary.
@E.P.: It's not my intention to be harsh, but I have a strong position on this. Indeed, naive is just an example which, moreover, cannot be misunderstood for another term. But cliche is not cliché: not only are they pronounced differently in French, but they also have different meanings and this can be a source of confusion. Then, if in the same paper or book, I find naive, cliche, Schrodinger and Thevenin (instead of Thévenin), I might wonder how much care was put into writing.
I'm perfectly in agreement with Schrodinger, Thevenin and cliche being quite jarring to read. However, certain words have been incorporated into the English language and acceptable forms include both with and without diacritics. The word naive is one such example, as are premiere and role. Would you expect authors to differentiate between the masculine naïf and the feminine naïve throughout? - Just to say that there is indeed a line after which diacritics can be omitted.
This answer demonstrates a misunderstanding of how words pass from one language to another. When a word from one language is considered fully incorporated in another, it is good and proper that its spelling is modified to match the usual spelling conventions of the target language. Which, in English, is to not use diacritics. When English words are incorporated into French, the opposite occurs and diacritics are added. See, for example, pénalty, which in French is only used in the context of sports such as football, and thus has a different meaning from the English word penalty.
@fkraiem: several English dictionaries have incorporated French words with their original spellings only. Look, for instance, at cliché or à la carte on dictionaries like Oxford or McMillan: they recorded only the original spelling (Merriam-Webster's reports, instead, also the alternative spellings cliche and a la carte). So, it seems to me that what you say, though not incorrect, is not generally recognized.
I personally always use them, mostly since my last name includes a dieresis, but most style guides only tell you to be consistent: either always use them, or never use them. Like Chris pointed out in his comment: consistency means consistency for each word. There have been some answers that point out that names should always be spelled with whatever accents marks the person uses. To do otherwise would be disrespectful. For other words it's up to you.
This normally means consistent for a given class of words though - and I would say the common classes in increasing order of importance of preserving accents are: Words commonly used in English (e.g. "naive") ; Foreign words used within a discipline (can't think of an accented example off the top of my head); Proper names (e.g. Möbius). Even more important is to be consistent per word.
@ChrisH True. I'll add that to my answer :) Most of the example from my discipline that have accents come from proper names, like Turán graphs.
You should follow the conventions of the style guide for the journal/publisher you're writing for. A general pattern is that words which have been fully borrowed and assimilated into English as ordinary vocabulary (such as "naive") tend to lose their diacritics, whereas words or phrases that are still considered foreign, flowery, or restricted to specialized use (e.g., détente, fin de siècle) tend to keep them. The place where you would most likely keep them is in proper nouns (especially names of people).
Essentially, if your editor spells and pronounces hôtel the French way, then you'll be spelling it naïve.
Exception: café, definitely fully naturalized in English, but nonetheless tends to keep its diacritic, possibly because it has a noticeable effect on the pronunciation.
Not having enough reputation for comments, I'll add my perspective on the topic with an answer.
There are words that have more than one accepted usage, such as naive/naïve or a la carte/à la carte, where accepted means these are actually alternative spellings and are shown in dictionaries. Here is a list of English words with diacritics; some of these words have alternative spellings.
However, while in some languages it may be acceptable to replace diacritics by a version without, such as the German ö replaced by oe, in other languages certain funny looking characters are not considered diacritics. An example that comes to mind is Finnish, where ä and ö are considered two vowels that also have their place in the alphabet, and not a version of a and o on steroids. As such and as stated here, "replacing them by ae and oe is not acceptable for Finnish".
So my view on the subject is to use them unless you're unable to; and I can't see why you would be unable to do so nowadays. I don't mind naive because it is still correct (and a widely used alternative spelling); Jyvaeskylae instead of Jyväskylä on the other hand, would just tell me you either do not know the correct spelling or are plain lazy.
As it's been pointed out in comments a la carte has a different meaning because a is a verb. It is sometimes cited as an alternative form, I just find it lazy, that accent being represented on all English keyboards.
@njzk2 What is the different meaning in English? "a" is not a verb in English.
@cpast: "a" is not a verb in English, that's not really relevant since the locution is not English but French. a is a verb form and à is a preposition. Using one for the other changes the signification. a la carte means (he) has the card/menu which makes little sense.
@njzk2: "As it's been pointed out in comments a la carte has a different meaning because a is a verb." -- Some dictionaries mention the alternative, others do not. Personally I prefer to use the diacritics. Some that are not displayed on the keyboard can still be used such as the umlaut which for me is Right-Alt + ´. Others not available as a shortcut or which I do not know are copied over; I find it doable since it only happens so much.
@njzk2 "à la carte" originated in French, but that doesn't mean its appearances in English text are snippets of French. The phrase has become part of English, and can evolve independently of its French origin (e.g. losing diacritical marks), which is perfectly valid language evolution.
@cpast: I can agree to most of that. The loosing of the diacritic can be indeed seen as an evolution and integration in the English language. I tend to see it as laziness (but then again, that is a valid reason to change the spelling)
The question you need to answer is what purpose the accent serves. Traditionally, in English and related languages, the accents have three purposes: to change pronunciation (for instance, the cedilla in the word soupçon causes the c to be pronounced like an s, not a k), to distinguish between homophones (as in French, between a, which means "have", and à, which means "at"), and to mark a change in historical spelling (the circumflex often indicates an s that has been lost to history, as in the French word hôpital, which used to be hospital).
My answer would be that an accent that shows a change in pronunciation (especially acute accents and diaereses) should be retained in formal writing, because we cannot know who will read it, and the reader may need these pronunciation aids; the same argument could be made for homophone distinctions, particularly in poetry.
However, if the accent marks a spelling change, it would depend on when the change occurred: there is no reason to continue to mark a spelling change that occurred before the word entered the English language. If the accent exists, for instance, on the French word, like contrôle, and it shows a letter was omitted long before the word was borrowed into English, then there is no reason to continue to mark the missing letter that was never part of the English spelling. There is, for instance, no mention on Oxford Dictionaries on-line of the spelling hôtel in English. The older word hostel came into the language in the middle ages, and is still spelled thus. The newer form hotel arrived in the mid-seventeenth century, when its French form was already spelled with a circumflex, and the two words were used differently. Hence, it is pointless to write hôtel; these are two separate words, not a change to an older form in English.
On the other hard, there are some newer conventions that are equally acceptable. The older spelling coöperate had already been completely lost by the time I learned to spell, twenty-five years ago, having been replaced by co-operate, which seems to do the same job, and so is perfectly reasonable. These days, cooperate seems to be quite common, and of course, there are no language police to say that it ought not be so; however, in formal writing, I still use the hyphen (as in e-mail; remember when there was still a hyphen there? And that was an originally English word! **And yes, it is okay to begin a sentence with the word "and"; your English teacher only said no because all young school children do it far to much).
I think do it far to much was intentional. However, On the other hard was a typo. I hope I am right.
It would be very hard to be consistent with the two dots, for example if you use it in naïve, you should probably use in coöperate, reënter, etc.
The diaeresis forbids to join in speech sounds of two vowels - it gives a hint to the reader not to read cooperate as in Cooper, or reenter as in reel
Sometimes we see them separated explicitly co-operation, re-enter, but since naive, cooperation, and reenter are very common, special orthographic rules may apply.
I would write:
naive
cooperate or co-operate
re-enter
"The diaeresis forbids to join in speech sounds of two vowels" This depends on the language. It is true in French, not in German for example. Moreover, of your examples, only naïve has an explicit diaeresis in French, coopérer is written as in English, and réentrer takes an accent on the first letter. Overall, I can't think of a single french word where there would be a tréma to separate two identical vowels.
There is another difference between your examples: naive is the only one to be directly taken from French, so adding the diacritic is only a matter of keeping the original spelling. Imo it is the same as café vs. cafe: both spellings correct, and consistency with the rest of the english language is not really an issue.
@T.Verron "This depends on the language. It is true in French, not in German for example." The question is about English, so I think we should assume that the answers are also about English unless otherwise mentioned.
@JiK I agree, but in the english language, accents only exist on foreign words (afaik, after all, English is not my native language). The examples in the question and comments include naive and Schrodinger, which is why I wanted to point out that this answer does not address the latter.
@T.Verron: Actually, it is just as true in German, because strictly speaking, a diaeresis is (as expressed by the word diaeresis) always about separating the pronunciation of two characters. In German, it only appears in a few names such as Piëch. German umlauts happen to use the same diacritic mark (two dots above the letter) as what is used for a diaeresis, but in spoken language, an umlaut and a diaeresis are two conceptually different things that just happen to have the same textual representation.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.527060 | 2015-01-20T19:19:37 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37212",
"authors": [
"AMV",
"Acoustics15",
"Anonymous",
"BMS",
"Cape Code",
"Chris H",
"Daniel",
"E.P.",
"Erin Carabini",
"Faten thamer",
"GEdgar",
"Harikrishnan R",
"I_wil_break_wall",
"JiK",
"Liam Marshall",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Mike76",
"Nobody",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Prateek Goyal",
"Pseudo Professor",
"Steve Jessop",
"Sureshkumar N",
"T. Verron",
"TRiG",
"Wrzlprmft",
"cpast",
"eykanal",
"fkraiem",
"gnasher729",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101296",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101297",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101298",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101301",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101302",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101310",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101358",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101375",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101397",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101483",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101497",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10371",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11565",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12864",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13404",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18324",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/201218",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21086",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22062",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22815",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24603",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27327",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4474",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/820",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8494",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/898",
"hvd",
"nitish swami",
"njzk2",
"ren",
"supercat",
"user141592"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
68584 | Which libraries are included in the Scopus citation database?
Is there a list of libraries which are included in the Scopus database?
I am working in the field of Human Computer Interaction and searching for a list of included libraries (e.g. ACM, AIS and so on).
I don't think Scopus manages their indexing by what you call "Libraries" (you probably mean publishers, and I agree that many publishers seem to call their online publishing platforms something like "digital library"). Instead, Scopus selects individual titles for indexing. That means that not all titles offered in a specific "library" may be contained in the database. Scopus offers a list of titles they are indexing on their website, which you could use to research the titles that you are interested in.
okay - maybe "including" in the search index is the right definition. I mean also ACM is calling their "platform" the ACM digital library and I thought Scopus (writting in a lot of review papers) is also including some of those "libraries" by working as a meta-search tool...
@ateam That's not correct. Scopus selects individual journals on the basis of their reckoning of quality. Despite being owned by Elsevier, Scopus don't index all of Elsevier's journals. https://awayofhappening.wordpress.com/2016/04/28/counting-elsevier-publications-indexed-in-scopus/
alright, so I can't say that all the papers which are available on ACM appear on Scopus because of their "reckoning of quality" algorithm?
@ateam Probably not, but to figure out, you could make a list of all titles on the ACM platform, a list of all ACM titles in Scopus, and see whether it's the same.
@MJeffryes Interesting link, thank's for sharing.
I have little to add to silvado's spot-on answer, but to answer an implied question: If your study is in HCI, then why not use ACM Digital Library citation counts? Why do you want to use Scopus? The idea of citation counts is that you want to see how many times all relevant literature has cited you studies of interest. In my view, any rigorous citation analysis study should use at least two sources:
Google Scholar: This is the biggest citation database, and captures almost everything, with no concern about the quality of the referring articles. Every other citation database is pretty much a subset of what Google Scholar captures.
At least one other relevant citation database: "Relevant" means that the citation database in question specializes on the topic area of interest, normally including almost all high-quality sources in the field. For HCI, this is doubtlessly ACM Digital Library (ACMDL)--HCI is a very explicit focus for ACM. ACMDL would probably have lower citation counts than Scopus, since Scopus includes far more sources, but in a sense they would "count" more, since they better reflect how much the articles have been cited in the HCI community.
I'm not sure if this captures your intent, but it is worth considering. If so, then it would render your concern moot about what exactly Scopus might or might not index.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.528771 | 2016-05-12T15:06:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/68584",
"authors": [
"Athulya Krishnan",
"David Curtis Flowers ",
"Jose Rosales",
"Knowing Horse",
"MJeffryes",
"Salah Mohamed Abaza",
"Stein-Kato Lindberg",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11207",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/193496",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/193497",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/193498",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/193499",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/193716",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/193717",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31487",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3890",
"mboeckle",
"silvado"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
90568 | How to cite paper with several co-first authors in APA style?
It's common in my field to have articles with many (>>6) authors including several "co-first authors." For example:
A. Anderson*, B. Brown*, C. Clark, D. Davidson, ..., Z. Zed
* These authors contributed equally to the work.
When citing a paper with many authors in APA style, one would normally use the following citation (Anderson et al. 2017).
However, in this case where there are multiple co-first authors, would it be appropriate to include all co-first authors in the citation e.g., "(Anderson, Brown et al. 2017)"?
Obviously, once there are 4 or more co-first authors, it gets cumbersome to include all of them. Also, I realize that this alternate citation format is by no means necessary if it's even allowed at all. My gut reaction is that this still would be inappropriate since it would look out of place; at the same time, I want to acknowledge all of the main authors' work on this article.
Short Answer: You should follow the standard citation style. E.g., "Anderson et al".
As far as I'm aware, there is nothing in APA style that speaks to an exception for the situation where the authors of a paper contribute equally or that set out multiple "first authors".
More generally:
Ultimately, author order is a thing that exists independent of contribution. It is often related to size of contribution. In particular, being first author is often related to making the greatest contribution. But disciplines vary substantially in the meaning of author order. And even in fields where first-author usually indicates greatest contribution, authors in other positions sometimes make greater or equivalent contributions. For example, in some cases the first and second author will have contributed equally. It seems more sensible to say that both authors contributed equally than to say that they were both "first authors", because at the end of the day, a reference has to have a canonical order to the authors. So whether the order of authors is determined by contribution, agreement, a coin toss, or a game of croquet, there is an order to the authors, and someone is first.
It seems strange that it would be the citing person's responsibility to adopt a citation style that captures every nuance of relative contribution in a given cited paper. An appropriate place to mention relative contribution of authors is in the author note in a paper. More generally, there are a lot of variants on the "co-first-author" scenario. In some cases, authors will note equal contribution or that author order was determined by a coin toss. Ultimately, this could all get very fuzzy.
It would make citations and references even more challenging to compile. Relative contribution of authors is not usually encoded in abstract and indexing services. And it is not encoded into reference management software such as Endnote or BibTeX formats as far as I'm aware. So it would be an additional hassle to keep track of these things.
The primary goal of citation styles is to unambiguously direct readers to sources. Managing author credit effectively is a secondary goal.
"Managing author credit effectively" might have been a secondary goal initially, but this is what is used nowadays by deciders to direct funding...
This is an interesting interpretation, but ultimately does not answer the question, since there are journals / publishers which do specify a citation policy for joint first authors. I believe the answer to this question is that while some publishers specify such guidelines, the APA specifically seems not to. Also I agree with gaborous; the theoretical considerations of consistent referencing versus the practical implications of what it implies about one's publication activity are two entirely different things.
My take: Language only changes when people change it, and the "authorities" catch up eventually. If you want dual first-authorship to be a thing, you need to CITE IT LIKE ITS A THING. Otherwise, being the second co-first author is functionally no different from being the second author. I believe the most appropriate method is a citation such as "(Anderson & Brown et al., 2017)". Most citation formats can already accommodate listing two or three authors in the in-text citation. There's no reason these two names can't be the co-first authors. This format implies that Anderson and Brown led a study, and others were involved who are omitted for brevity. It rewards the co-first authors with actual ACKNOWLEDGMENT of their contributions, rather than letting most people, who won't read the footnotes on the original study, think that there was only one first author, whoever was listed first. Cite your papers like this and let the editors tell you if they don't like it. Change has to start somewhere.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.529055 | 2017-06-06T23:13:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90568",
"authors": [
"Tasos Papastylianou",
"gaborous",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3971",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58645"
],
"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
} |
196719 | Who said that one should change one’s direction of research every seven years?
A piece of wisdom I have heard several times is that an academic should change their direction of research roughly every seven years. This change needs not be radical but clearly more than what you naturally do within those seven years.
Does anybody have a reliable source for this rule of thumb? I heard this being attributed to Feynman, but neither with nor without his name can I find something on the Internet. I may have gotten the details of the quote wrong of course (e.g., seven instead of eight years).
Please mind that this is not about whether this advice is actually valid or why it may be.
One of the most wise methodologies for those who seek anything. Change is more cerebral than habit, to vary habitats and occupations.
Sounds like a good excuse to switch research to how often one should switch research directions.
I think I found it! Richard Hamming, mathematician and Turing Award recipient said it in a 1986 seminar at Bell Labs. The talk was titled "You and Your Research", and a transcript is available here. The most relevant part is in the Q&A session after the main talk:
Question: You mentioned the problem of the Nobel Prize and the subsequent notoriety of what was done to
some of the careers. Isn't that kind of a much more broad problem of fame? What can one do?
Hamming: Some things you could do are the following. Somewhere around every seven years make a significant, if not complete, shift in your field. Thus, I shifted from numerical analysis, to hardware, to software, and so on, periodically, because you tend to use up your ideas. When you go to a new field, you have to start over as a baby. You are no longer the big mukity muk and you can start back there and you can start planting those acorns which will become the giant oaks. Shannon, I believe, ruined himself. In fact when he left Bell Labs, I said, "That's the end of Shannon's scientific career." I received a lot of flak from my friends who said that Shannon was just as smart as ever. I said, "Yes, he'll be just as smart, but that's the end of his scientific career," and I truly believe it was.
You have to change. You get tired after a while; you use up your originality in one field. You need to get
something nearby. I'm not saying that you shift from music to theoretical physics to English literature; I mean within your field you should shift areas so that you don't go stale. You couldn't get away with forcing a change every seven years, but if you could, I would require a condition for doing research, being that you will change your field of research every seven years with a reasonable definition of what it means, or at the end of 10 years, management has the right to compel you to change. I would insist on a change because I'm serious. What happens to the old fellows is that they get a technique going; they keep on using it. They were marching in that direction which was right then, but the world changes. There's the new direction; but the old fellows are still marching in their former direction.
You need to get into a new field to get new viewpoints, and before you use up all the old ones. You can do
something about this, but it takes effort and energy. It takes courage to say, "Yes, I will give up my great reputation." For example, when error correcting codes were well launched, having these theories, I said,
"Hamming, you are going to quit reading papers in the field; you are going to ignore it completely; you are
going to try and do something else other than coast on that." I deliberately refused to go on in that field. I wouldn't even read papers to try to force myself to have a chance to do something else. I managed myself, which is what I'm preaching in this whole talk. Knowing many of my own faults, I manage myself. I have a lot of faults, so I've got a lot of problems, i.e. a lot of possibilities of management.
The Shannon referred to in the quote would be Claude E. Shannon, who is often called "the father of information theory". Shannon laid the foundations for this discipline while at Bell Labs, and in his talk Hamming suggests that Shannon would not continue to "plant acorns" afterwards.
While it isn't really phrased as a recommendation for others, it is perhaps also worth noting that
Donald Cram (1987 Nobel laureate in chemistry) has said
To retain my fascination with chemistry, I have had to change my research fields about every 10 years.
This quote can be found in I. Hargittai (2003) Candid Science III: More Conversations with Famous Chemists. Imperial College Press, p. 192.
Thanks for finding this, really interesting.
Hamming was indeed a fascinating personality. His mathematical books on numerical analysis, probability and digital filters, even though somehow outdated now, are an interesting reading nonetheless.
I read once that Hamming would ask interview candidates: "What's the most important problem in your field?" And then he'd follow up by asking "Why aren't you working on it?"
P.S. His Book The Art Of Doing Science And Engineering - Learning To Learn is well worth reading (and there's a beautiful edition of it from Stripe Press).
I am sure many scholars came up with this piece of advice. This is an excerpt from an interview with Ludvig Faddeev published in the newspaper of Saint Petersburg State University, № 5 (3791), 30.03.2009:
I recall, many told me: "Why are you abandoning this gold mine? You have just started it, and it's high time to develop it. Keep on digging..." I am, however, dead set against digging gold mines. And this is what I have preached to my disciples: if you have written five works on a certain topic -- leave it and seek another topic. It is important to switch topics... As a result of this, my disciples and I have a broad variety of directions of research.
However, in academic folklore this piece of advice of his was known long before that. I learned about this rule of Faddeev, through word of mouth, back in my undergraduate years in Saint Petersburg, which was in the early 1980s.
I was fortunate to attend a talk by Richard Bellman around 1970, and he recommended inventing a new field, finding the early and easy results, then moving on and letting others find and prove the obscure and difficult theorems.
Paul Halmos in his biography I Want to Be a Mathematician (1985) raised that point several times, however he gave himself only five years. Here are some excerpts:
I had a theory, first subconscious and later deliberate, that the way to stay young is to change fields often. I never did become an algebraist, but I did change from measure theory (under which I mean to include probability and ergodic theory) to Hilbert space, then to algebraic logic, and then back to Hilbert space, with some dabbling with topological groups and statistics sprinkled in. After about thirty years, around 1968, I realized that I wasn't likely to be able to change again, and, at about the same time, I started writing more expository papers (such as "Ten problems in Hilbert space") and sermons (such as "How to write mathematics").
In the late 1940's I began to act on one of my beliefs: to stay young, you have to change fields every five years. Looking back on it I can now see a couple of aspects of that glib commandment that weren't always obvious. One; I didn't first discover it and then act on it, but, instead, noting that I did in fact seem to change directions every so often, I made a virtue out of a fact and formulated it as a piece of wisdom. Two: it works. A creative thinker is alive only so long as he grows; you have to keep learning new things to understand the old. You don't really have to change fields—but you must stoke the furnace, branch out, make a strenuous effort to keep from being locked in.
The physicist George Uhlenbeck was another famous scientist known for repeating a maxim like this, although I don't know whether he every specified how long one should pursue an area of research before changing to something else. Uhlenbeck's student Seth Putterman described his advisor's view in the introduction to Putterman's book, Superfluid Hydrodynamics:
In April 1968 during my second year as a graduate student at the Rockefeller University I was one afternoon surprised to see upon entering my thesis adviser’s office, a large pile of books and papers dealing with superfluidity. My adviser G. E. Uhlenbeck proceeded to ask me if I knew of any other works on this subject. I replied by asking what had brought about this shift of emphasis away from relativistic thermodynamics. His answer was that changing fields was a time tested means of renewing himself and to bring it about he had committed himself to give a course on superfluidity (along with T. M. Sanders, Jr.) in the 1968 summer school at the University of Colorado. In this way he assured me that his course would also fulfill the first requirement of Ehrenfest: that the teacher learn something.
He first became famous for co-devising (with Samuel Goudsmit, when they were both graduate students of Paul Ehrenfest) the idea of electron spin, but he changed topics frequently. Over time, he worked a wide range of topics related to statistical, thermal, and fluid mechanics: the quantum Boltzmann equation, biased and damped Brownian motion, the relativistic thermodynamics that Putterman had been expecting to work on, and superfluidity.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.529438 | 2023-05-27T15:06:49 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/196719",
"authors": [
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"Lamar Latrell",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Simon Crase",
"bandybabboon",
"davidbak",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/150075",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38586",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51948"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
89959 | Studying medicine in Germany
I'm a medical student from Alexandria, Egypt. By next year I'll have completed the pre-clinical phase of the program and I'm wondering if I can study the clinical phase in Germany (Germany has the same program arrangement)
Is there a test that l can take to study the clinical phase directly without having to start all over ?
German universities have a process to determine whether exams etc passed at a different institution shall be deemed equivalent to a degree component there. This is handled by the individual departments, the keyword is "anrechnen". When moving between similar degrees inside Germany, this will usually be straight-forward.
When you are asking for courses from Egypt to be counted, you'd probably need to provide a very detailed syllabus and maybe additional sources to make the case that they indeed cover everything important the German course would have. To get a clear decision, you would probably need to at least apply, maybe even enrol at the German university.
When studying medicine in Germany, the step from pre-clinical studies to clinical studies is when students take the first component of the Staatsexamen. I expect that it would be much easier to get the individual pre-clinical courses deemed equivalent, and thus get authorized to sit the first component of the Staatsexamen, than it would be to get any foreign exam counted as the first component of the Staatsexamen itself.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.530277 | 2017-05-24T19:55:30 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/89959",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
111343 | Citation depth dilemma (writing sci. article for peer review journal)
The scenario:
in an article, found a point/claim/fact that would fit/support perfectly a broader point I'm trying to construct (@Related works section)
The dilemma:
Whom to cite?
a) only the article in which I found the [whole] point/claim/synthesis
b) the original sources, the author cited during his construction of the point
c) both i.e. the complete paragraph or part of the paragraph that serves my purpose
Pros and cons:
a)
Pro: I pay proper respect to the author from whom I learnt about the sources/facts. + the article is the only source I really read
Con: I would have single reference to support the point, while in reality there are several relevant sources (used by the author)
b)
Pro: I would provide the reader with deeper/direct references for further researching
Con: it is a form of plagiarism, as it would seem that it was me that read all the sources and drawn conclusion presented. The conclusion is not the issue, I discuss that particular point anyway (in my paper), but the first part bothers me: it wasn't me that studied all that sources, but the author
c) seems to me as just solution but I'm not sure how it should be formulated so it is clear for reader what is reference (let it be: [1]) from the article and what (sub) references are just taken from the article (let them be: [1.a] [1.b])
Alternatively, (and this is what I would normally do):
I follow his references, find the articles, read them and then use (some or all of) them together with other references (known to me from earlier research). The issue with such practice: too often there is no justification for referencing his article -- and it seems not to be not right i.e. smells to me like a tiny plagiarism-sin.
The example:
....
To achieve the first goal, the crawler has to visit as many web sites as possible, and to achieve the second goal, the crawler has to
maintain the freshness of the previously visited web sites, which can
be achieved by re-visiting such web sites in a routinely manner. In
the following, the most frequently used re-visiting policies are
summarized: (1) Uniform policy: in this policy, the entire web sites
are downloaded at each visit (Bhute and Meshram, 2010; Pichler et al.,
2011; Leng et al., 2011; Sharma et al., 2012; Singh and Vikasn, 2014).
Although this approach enriches the databases, it requires a large
processing time. (2) Proportional policy: this policy is performed in
many ways, such as: • Downloading only the pages that have a rank more
than a threshold value specified by the crawler administrator (Bhute
and Meshram, 2010;)
From the article:
ALQARALEH, S., RAMADAN, O., & SALAMAH, M. (2015). Efficient watcher
based web crawler design. Aslib Journal of Information Management,
67(6), 663–686. http://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-02-2015-0019
In my article I want to explain/define these two policies, together with his remarks, my own remarks, and, potentially, to expand (support) it with other sources.
@corey979: exactly what I thought of - why put that as a comment instead of an answer
Thanks guys!
btw. on this forum I still have no "comment up vote" privilege, otherwise I would use it
As often when it comes to writing it is key to think about this from the viewpoint of the reader. Write and cite so that it is as easy as possible for the reader to get the point and find the relevant literature. If you are unsure how to do this think of your past self as the reader, i.e. think about how you would have wanted the passage to be when you did not know much about the field you are writing about.
I am considering only the case where there was substantial synthesis in the article encountered. Merely encountering a relevant citation in another source has already been discussed in other questions.
Since synthesis is an intellectual contribution itself, Option b) of only citing the foundational sources and recreating the synthesis without crediting the intermediate author is plagiarism, and thus out of consideration.
Option a), citing the synthesized claim without delving into the details or the sources it is based on, is acceptable. It has to be acceptable, otherwise the rabbit hole never ends. Considerations for whether to use it include the following:
Is the point made a very important one for the paper we are writing? Does it merits being discussed at length?
Is the point a contentious one? Would explaining HOW the author we cite arrived at it help convince our own readership of it?
Are we subject to restrictive page limits?
Would the authors-at-arms-length benefit from the extra citations/credit?
Option c), crediting everyone involved, is obviously always acceptable. As an example of how this could look like, take the following:
Skywalker (12 ABY) explains that the light side of the force should be preferred, drawing from earlier arguments put forth by Yoda (3 BBY) and Kenobi (6 BBY). Skywalker particular stresses the merits of Yoda's observation that 'there is no try, there is only do' (Yoda 3 BBY).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.530424 | 2018-06-17T11:57:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/111343",
"authors": [
"Sascha",
"hardyVeles",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53466",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74682"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
54831 | Is it common for a journal to reject a paper after accepting it subject to minor revisions?
Is it common for a journal to reject a paper after previously accepting it?
When a paper of mine was first reviewed, one of the reviewers was okay with the paper and the other one requested minor revisions. The journal clearly said that the paper was accepted, subject to minor amendments and even went on to mention tentative publication dates. I then quickly made the required revisions.
Both the initial reviewers accepted it, but the editors solicited a third reviewer. These reviewer’s comments were not that specific but just referred to things like some of the citations are too old and he had problems with the methodology and contribution and then in other places he goes completely off topic saying that the paper implies certain things that I certainly do not say and are very far from what I am discussing in this paper. Now the journal has rejected the paper.
Was the acceptance letter unconditional, or did it say that the paper would be accepted if certain changes were satisfactorily made? In the former situation, I don't see that the journal has a very strong case. I would consider sending a polite but clearly worded letter to the editor in chief saying that they gave you their word in writing and you will hold them to it.
It clearly says accepted, subject to minor amendments and then goes on to even mention tentative publication dates and that I should turn in my revision as soon as possible to meet those dates, otherwise discuss other dates if I could not meet the turnaround time
So, did you address all of the reviewer's comments in the revised manuscript and/or cover letter? Yes, even the comments that 'went off the rails' - my guess would be that you didn't touch those, and that reviewer was not happy. Perhaps they weren't so far off the rails after all.
Both the reviewers who initially reviewed the paper said that they were happy with my revisions and had no further comments. However, a third reviewer was solicited after I resubmitted and he is the one who was not happy. This reviewer was not in the picture the first time round
@PeteL.Clark: Demanding that they "stick to their word" doesn't seem productive here. The editor seems to be convinced that the paper is seriously flawed, and if he were right, then I'd say it would be appropriate for him to reject it at any time before publication has actually occurred. Otherwise, what are they going to do? "Stick to their word" by publishing it, and then immediately publish a retraction of the seriously flawed paper? I think it would be better to try to get a higher-up to look at the new review and notice that it's crazy, and that the paper is not actually flawed.
@Nate: It is not actually clear to me that if the editor thinks the paper is seriously flawed, the right thing to do is to back out of publishing it. The OP hasn't mentioned her field; in many academic fields whether a work is "correct" is something that community members can disagree on, and in certain other fields (like physics) publishing a paper with an interesting idea or hypothesis that turns out not to hold water is not considered shameful. Here's the question: why did the editorial board do further vetting after the paper was accepted?
That the journal has broken a promise to the OP and wasted the OP's time does count for something. Obviously we are not privy to what is actually going on, but none of the comments the OP mentioned seem to be of the "this is dead wrong" variety. It sounds like more of a judgment call, and knowing that the OP views the action of the journal as a reneging on its word could well be enough to change their mind. Or, if it turns out that the editorial board has grave reservations about the paper, they should say so explicitly to the OP. The OP deserves more information than she's gotten.
None of the comments so far are addressing OP's actual question. The answer is: No, it is not common. In fact I believe it is extremely uncommon, and I personally never heard of such a thing happening. The only situation where I imagine it would make sense for the acceptance of a paper to be withdrawn is if new information came to light that suggests that the paper is fraudulent or largely incorrect. From the OP's description that doesn't sound like what happened here.
Is it common for a journal to reject a paper after previously accepting it?
It’s certainly not common, but it’s also not entirely unheard of or something that should never happen per se. Coincidentally something along that lines happened to me yesterday.
See this from the journal’s point of view: When they consult somebody as a reviewer, they assume them reliable and thus it would be odd to fully ignore their judgement. If this reviewer raised severe objections, it would be unwise of the journal to leave them unaddressed.
On the other hand, if two reviewers gave a positive evaluation of your paper, it seems equally unwise to reject your paper without even giving you the opportunity to react to the third reviewer’s criticisms. I thus strongly suggest that you check the wording of the journal’s decision letter and your paper’s status carefully as to whether your paper was actually rejected or they just want you to address the third reviewer’s comments and decide upon that. If your paper was actually rejected, you might want to consider a rebuttal due to the above reasons.
What seems a little odd is that a third reviewer was considered at this stage. Could it be that this reviewer was asked in the first round of revision and turned their review in only recently for some reason?
Finally, a sidenote: If the reviewer actually argued against your paper because it “implies certain things”, this gives you a strong argument for rebuttal. Even if a paper’s result imply that the first law of thermodynamics does not hold, it should not be rejected on that basis.
Journals do whatever they want without oversight or logic. It is generally a tactic used with new authors who aren’t well known or have a long track record with the journal. It can be due to many other reasons ranging from blithe idiocy of some apathetic whimsical or unqualified reviewer. But, there are certain nefarious impulses that are at play (i.e. power struggle within an institution or journal or an industrial contact asks them not to accept a certain paper). Integrity in publishing is present in certain journals, in many other journals it is who you know. Nepotism, even when it’s double blinded (so called) reviews! Go figure the world of print works like the world of people!
This seems more like a rant than an answer which addresses the question. Perhaps you could trim it or tone it down, while maintaining the core point?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.530991 | 2015-09-22T21:17:19 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/54831",
"authors": [
"Abdullahi",
"AromaticArman",
"Dan Romik",
"Faith M",
"Jon Custer",
"Mary Win",
"Md. Touhidul Islam",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Rajesh Dutta",
"Spammer",
"Tom",
"Yemon Choi",
"Yer",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149817",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149818",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149819",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149820",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149821",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149822",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149871",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149872",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149874",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41478",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52718",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"wpb"
],
"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
} |
80237 | Is it okay to share a tex template from a journal for teaching purposes?
I am a graduate student in a university. I was an undergraduate student on the same university, and I have good feelings for the workplace where I did my undergraduate studies (very much so that I keep close contact with the students).
In order to enhance the writing abilities of the students (it is a Mathematics course), I had the idea of making a "toy" journal, where students would be able to submit what they were studying/thought was interesting/etc. The main objective is to improve writing and exposition capabilities, and providing motivation for the students.
In order to make the idea go forward, I considered taking a (tex) template from a journal and sending it to the students for them to write using the template. This would be excellent in terms of efficiency. However, I feel that even though this "toy" journal has only internal intentions and is only this: a "toy" journal, there may be some ethics issue on taking a possibly copyrighted asset.
I would like to know:
Are there any issue with the above, given the intentions?
If there is no issue, is there a standard way to ask for permission?
If that is not possible, are there any good free templates available?
@MassimoOrtolano Thank you for the suggestion. I did it. Could you turn your comment into an answer so I can accept it?
I think that's a cool idea for getting students engaged with the topic and doing research.
Several journals have made their LaTeX classes available on CTAN: I suggest you to pick one of them.
Example journal classes available on CTAN are:
amsart
IEEEtran
elsarticle
As Federico Poloni rightly suggests, check anyway the license of the package you want to use, which is written on the CTAN page of the package.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.531651 | 2016-11-22T03:28:09 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/80237",
"authors": [
"Aloizio Macedo",
"Jeff",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41836",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57314"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
60248 | What do all the numbers mean in a pubmed shorthand citation?
At the top of a pubmed abstract, there's a "shorthand" citation, and I don't know what the numbers mean. For example:
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008;1129:323-9. doi: 10.1196/annals.1417.017.
What do all these numbers mean? Obviously, I understand that 2008 is the year, but I don't know what anything refers to after that.
volume 1129, pages 323 to 329
There are two parts to the citation that you gave. The first part is an abbreviated citation:
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008;1129:323-9
"Ann N Y Acad Sci." is an abbreviation for "Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences" which is a journal published by the New York Academy of Sciences. 2008 is the year of publication, 1129 is the volume number and 323-(32)9 are the pages of the volume containing this particular paper.
The second part
doi: 10.1196/annals.1417.017
is a "Digital Object Identifier", which is a standardized unique number for the publisher's online version of the paper. The DOI isn't supposed to have any particular meaning other than as a key that can be used to lookup a particular paper. In this case the publisher has chosen to include "annals" (short hand for the journal title) as part of the DOI, but that's not really required.
The DOI system is maintained by an organization called CrossRef. Publishers pay a fee for membership in the organization and are given a part of the DOI name space in which they can assign identifiers.
CrossRef maintains a central database which keys off of these DOI numbers. The central database contains the metadata (journal title, article title, authors, etc.) for this paper, along with a link to the publisher's copy of the paper. If this metadata changes for some reason (e.g. an authors name was misspelled) the metadata can be updated in the database. More importantly, if the publisher rearranges its website at a later date and moves the online copy of the paper to a different URL, they can update this link while leaving the DOI unchanged.
You can go to
http://crossref.org/
and enter a DOI to find the metadata about the corresponding article.
You can also use a link like
http://dx.doi.org/10.1196/annals.1417.017
to refer to the article. When a web browser accesses this link, it will be redirected to the current location of the paper based on the record in the crossref database.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.531858 | 2015-12-17T21:38:12 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60248",
"authors": [
"Ali Baig",
"Anonymous",
"Ayushi Sharma",
"Ciodar",
"GEdgar",
"Jano N.",
"Manuelito Cortes",
"Mathematician",
"Venus_F",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166657",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166658",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166659",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166681",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166693",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166701",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166728",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/166729",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4484",
"lousycoder"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
167386 | Can you resubmit a rejected manuscript to the same journal if you have made many changes to improve the manuscript?
Last year one of my papers was rejected. The editor provided the comments of referees so I have continued to work on this paper following their suggestion. I have done a great deal of work and I think that now the paper is really worth a publication.
I was considering to resubmit it to the same journal: can I do this or is it frowned upon?
I have done something similar. I provided detailed responses to the comments from reviewers and also outline the main changes -- basically arguing why my paper should be treated as a 'new' paper. The editor accepted my argument and allowed my paper to enter the review process - in my case, it was sent to the same reviewers. It is up to the Editor-in-Chief to decide whether it is a 'waste' of reviewers' time.
Some journals won't accept a resubmission after rejection. For some others it might depend on the reason for rejection. If the editor deemed it not suitable for the journal it isn't likely to be reconsidered.
But otherwise you should be able to resubmit it. You can also ask the editor whether it would be advisable or not. Follow their advice, of course.
And "frowned upon" only matters if the editor is the one frowning.
If you submit a previously-rejected paper to the journal, what happens in principle* is that the editorial management system flags the paper as a duplicate. Screenshot if you want to see what it looks like from the other side.
Once flagged, the editor (or more likely the desk editor, i.e. the employee of the publisher) will have to decide if they should pass the paper on to begin the peer review process. The default reaction will be "no". You will need to convince them otherwise. The easiest way is to write an explanation in the cover letter. There's a good chance they'll be looking at the previous reviewer reports while making this decision, so you might want to address the reports directly.
The worst that can happen is that your paper is desk rejected. Rather more likely (assuming you did a good job updating the paper) is that the paper is sent for review, but the same reviewers that reviewed the original paper are invited again.
tl; dr: yes, you can resubmit.
*This is only in principle. It's possible the journal fails to detect the resubmission.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.532124 | 2021-05-09T13:12:08 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/167386",
"authors": [
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/132073"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
24212 | Why does a university not require me to send proof of high school degree?
I'm applying to a online Bachelor of arts degree at a very well established university in the United States.
However, I'm almost through the application process and at no point did they require an actual print of my high school diploma. They simply asked me to sign (digitally through docusign.net) that I have completed high school. I've been corresponding with an agent of theirs and according to him they are just reviewing what I've sent them (which does not include a diploma) and after that I can enroll.
I do have a high school diploma but how come they don't require proof of this?
EDIT: Continued story:
I recently got accepted into a university and they had me attest to having a high school diploma, which I did. After being accepted without needing to provide any proof of having said diploma, I naturally asked why they didn't ask me to provide proof of graduation.
They replied: "We randomly select 1 out of every 20 students to provide further documentation. You would’ve been selected at this point so it looks like you were not chosen."
Is this normal in the United States? Where I'm from (Iceland) this just sounds plain weird...That potentially 95% of students can get in without a diploma at all?
I suspect the point of traditional (i.e. brick and mortar) colleges demanding to see proof of high school graduation or equivalent is to insure that they don't waste time and class-space (i.e. money) on a student who won't fit in and won't graduate. A misfit student will impose lower (though not zero) costs on a on-line program. Maybe they just don't consider the cost of a more careful check worth their time at this point?
Why would they? One of my undergraduate classmates was expelled from high school a month before graduation. When he contacted the university admissions office for advice, they asked "Did you get an admission letter?" When he said yes, they said "Well, then you've been admitted. See you in August!" and hung up.
For the traditional admissions process, most high school students apply to university before they finish. It is in fact not feasible to require that they submit their high school diplomas, as most applicants will only earn said diplomas a few months into the future. (Note that the United States is not unique in that regard: in Britain the admission process will often ask the "high school" for predicted/expected grades on the standardized exams; though the British practice of extending "conditional" offers doesn't seem popular in the US.)
Most US universities will ask for a transcript from high school to be sent to the university upon graduation (as a condition for acceptance). Most HS students who apply to a university do not yet have a HS diploma because the application process happens in the fall of the last year of HS.
@JeffE you might be dating yourself. By the time I was a student, admission offers contained language about the offer being conditional upon satisfactory grades in your final year.
@StrongBad I think this is more a feature of my undergrad institution than the year I entered. (Unless, of course, you went to the same place I did.)
@JeffE didn't go to the same school, but you are old :) Those offered admission are expected to complete the remainder of their high school courses with the same superior performance that led to their admission
@StrongBad Sigh. I used to be young, and Rice used to be proudly weird.
This is not normal in the US -- but that doesn't mean it's an illegitimate process. Private institutions can select applications using whatever criteria they deem appropriate; so while it sounds a bit questionable to me, it's perfectly within reason.
It is also perfectly valid to admit students without a high school degree; it happens to be uncommon, but depending on the subject matter of the BA, it may not be (at least in the university's eyes) a strict necessity, provided your other credentials are sound.
From a technical standpoint proof is really hard. Anyone can print up a fancy looking diploma on nice paper, so a diploma is not really proof. Similarly a dishonest student could produce fraudulent letters of reference.
Even if the university independently found the contact information for the school, got in touch with someone who could verify if someone was a student they would not be done yet. The university would then need to verify the student was in fact who they said they were. While forging government documents (e.g., a passport) is more extreme than forging a diploma, if the verification of the diploma was only done on the basis of a name, then a dishonest student only needs to find someone who had the same name as them and graduated about the same time as them.
I'm not sure your second paragraph represents a real risk to the school, as the dishonest student would never receive any credit, as it would all be listed under the other name.
Contrary to popular belief, in the United States a high school diploma is not required to enrol in a bachelor's degree. Indeed, there are no universal requirements at all. Each university is allowed to set its own admission standards, which might make a high school diploma manditory.
Personally, I obtained a bachelor's degree and a PhD without completing a high school diploma. At Simon's Rock College, nearly all the students are completing bachelor's degrees without completing high school. The practice of blurring the boundaries between high school and college is a trend right now.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.532432 | 2014-06-30T23:01:52 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24212",
"authors": [
"Andrei Sedoi",
"Ben Voigt",
"Chris Chi",
"Dan Friedman",
"Dmitry Rubanovich",
"Hououin Kyouma",
"JeffE",
"Mekonnen Tekle",
"StrongBad",
"Willie Wong",
"dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42012",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64886",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64887",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64888",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64924",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66080",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66081",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68110",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8705",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94",
"rdvtrro",
"user35393"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
17117 | Best way to respond to a request for CV
A couple of weeks ago I met this person who had come to our institute for an invited talk. Her domain of work was same as my area of research. Later I discussed with her some of the topics and asked her if there are any openings in her company (she is in the industry as an R&D head). She responded: "Send me your CV, I will look into it."
Now I want to write to her. How do I begin with that? Should I send my CV in the first mail itself? If so should I also include a cover letter? What's the best way to introduce myself?
Do you have a website with your cv? Having one is a good idea and can avoid dealing with such requests.
Since any potential job is apparently outside of academia, you might want to ask on http://workplace.stackexchange.com/
Well... there are lot of important variables not mentioned, but this is how I will generally draft it:
Dear Madam Give-me-a-job,
It was great talking to you after your talk on Jan 17th, 2014 at
My-Little-Institute. I found your experience and nature of your job
fascinating. In our conversation about pursuing a career in
Whatever-you-are-working-in, you were so kind to offer giving comments
to my CV. And if you don't mind, I would love to take up your
generous offer.
Attached please find my CV. I would love to follow up with you in two
weeks and set up a phone conversation to discuss how I can strengthen
my profile so that I can be a more competitive candidate in this job
market. Thank you very much for your time, and I look forward to your invaluable critiques and suggestions.
Sincerely yours,
Penguin Knight
My approach:
Don't treat it like a lead to a job. She might just say that to be nice. If I come off too pushy, I may not even get a chance listening to her comments. For that reason, I will not attach a cover letter that details my experience, research interest, and why I am suitable for the position. There isn't even a job, a catch-all cover letter is difficult to write and hard to be made impressive.
Ask for follow up and act on it. A lot of the "send me your CV" didn't get follow up because the candidate really just "sent the CV" and that's the end of it. I specifically tweaked it as wanting advices from her, making it easier for both parties to engage in another conversation.
No need to worry about "what if she really just gives me comments?" She probably knows and remembers. If my CV is really good, she will mention the availability of openings. If there isn't or I am not good enough, then I can use this chance to flush out weaknesses and improve them.
I don't understand your answer: "I will not attach a cover letter" what is the thing in yellow if not the cover letter?
@cbeleites, you can call that e-mail a cover letter. The cover letter in my mind (the one that I will not send) was a separate letter detailing my research experience, interests, and why I am suitable for the posted job. I revised the answer to clarify.
All jobs I have applied for (via email), which to be honest isn't very many, I have written a brief, courteous email introducing the proper cover letter and CV as PDF attachments. For a number of reasons (formatting, ease of distribution, professionalism etc), I think it's a bad idea to make the email itself a cover letter.
@Moriarty OK for formatting (though not much is needed) but why is making me have to open two files in an external program more professional or easier to distribute?
@terdon Because there is a potential for formatting to get messed up on different devices through forwarded emails. Nothing wrong with combining the CV and cover letter into one PDF - many job ads request that specifically.
I wouldn't make a big deal of it:
FirstName,
Good to meet you the other day. Interesting presentation.
Attached is my CV as discussed.
Best wishes,
Your full name
Most people are busy and they're not going to read more than a couple of sentences anyway.
Also, the longer the email, the more desperate and obsequious your tone; save time and your dignity - keep it brief.
While shorter is better, especially in industry, too short can come across as lack of interest and that is usually a turn-off.
If you want to save your dignity, I recommend writing in complete sentences.
I agree with the notion of keeping it short, although @BenWebster has a very valid point ;)
Try with a Haiku: Was good to meet you / Here attached is my CV / Best wishes Your name.
Indeed, if I received this note, I'd bit-bucket it because there's no evidence the sender is actually interested. Brief is fine, but this is too brief.
I'd go as far as to say that this email is so short on evidence of interest that it closely resembles many spam messages I get; if I received such an email and I wasn't paying close attention to (or didn't remember) the name of the sender, this would go into my spam folder right away.
@ben abbreviating/truncating sentences in writen communication by omitting obvious and unambiguous pronouns and verbs is a very old, common and acceptable practice (probably dating back to the telegraph, where the cost was charged per letter/word). The implied sentence is clear and meaningful. My dignity is intact.
@Bohemian Telegrams were also often written in all caps. That doesn't make it good email practice. I agree that what you've written would sound fine as spoken English if you said it, but written in an email, I don't think it comes off well. Would it really be that hard to write instead: "It was good to meet you the other day. I really enjoyed your interesting presentation. I've attached my CV as we discussed." instead?
@Ben your version sounds fine. Perhaps mine is too casual. Fine. Morse code, which the telegraph used, doesn't cater for mixed case.
Hello (Speaker-name),
We spoke on (date here) when you came to our institution and presented
on (topic here). I very much enjoyed your speech and our discussion
afterwards on (a few words on what you talked about) and possible
openings in your company. As discussed, I've attached my cover letter
and resume for your consideration.
Thanks so much, and I look forward to hearing back from you!
Sincerely,
(Your name here)
My post is making the email a bit less formal, as I assume you talked to her in an informal way. By bringing up where you guys were, when you met, and what you talked about, you're likely sparking her memory (unless she gave two talks and had identical conversations that day, which is unlikely). I'd also keep the email relatively concise, because your intent is to seek jobs, not make a new friend.
Personally, I would attach my cover letter, because the cover letter gives a better indication on not only what your skills and past experience is, but also on what your desired position is. It also gives the employer a bit more indication into what you're like as a person, and whether or not they'd want to hire you.
This is all, of course, assuming you're emailing her and not mailing it. If you mail it, I would put a shorter version of this email into the cover letter and only send the cover letter and resume.
CV and cover letter in an email and maybe send physical copies as well.
Just a friendly brief email with the attachments in the companies preferred format.
Make sure to mention the sort of position you are looking for in the cover letter.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:50.532949 | 2014-02-18T19:03:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/17117",
"authors": [
"Akash Preet",
"Anton Smirnov",
"Ben Webster",
"Bohemian",
"Federico Poloni",
"James",
"Jasser",
"Kushal",
"Lazzaro Campeotti",
"Lev Reyzin",
"Miae Kim",
"Moriarty",
"Penguin_Knight",
"PollPenn",
"Reid",
"Relaxed",
"abhishek tyagi",
"cbeleites",
"earthling",
"estradasa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10173",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11523",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11596",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12077",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15454",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46150",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46151",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46156",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46158",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46162",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46163",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46164",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46177",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46224",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46226",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5674",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6450",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8562",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"johnchase",
"osiixy",
"posdef",
"terdon"
],
"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.