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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
190539 | Can we consider the Stack Exchange Q & A process to be research? And can we refer to it on our cv/resume, etc. especially for admission & funding?
I have seen a definition of research in the Cambridge Dictionary. It says:
a detailed study of a subject, especially in order to discover (new) information or reach a (new) understanding:
Here we see that two news things are created 1) Information 2) Understanding
So I am bit confused. Can we also consider this Stack Exchange process of posting question and answers as research, especially in domains like scientific and technical domains like Stack Overflow and electrical engineering domains, etc.?
I am not talking about the very basic level questions that are being asked here because there solutions/answer are already obvious to many. Instead I am talking about the case of a bit advanced level questions.
Actually, I am very much interested in learning new knowledge, but I don't have any publications. But I have posted many many questions on Stack Exchange.
I want to apply for MS (Masters) admission and funding in European and US universities. Can I refer my potential supervisor to my questions of Stack Exchange, in order to improve chances of my application confirmation/approval?
"So i am bit confused" You confusion stems from the assumption that the Cambridge Dictionary reflects what academicians mean by "research". It doesn't, at least if you interpret "new" as "new to you" rather than "new relative to the sum total of human knowledge". (I assume that your questions at Stack Exchange didn't advance the frontier of human knowledge.) For example, plenty of parents research vaccines in the sense outlined by the Cambridge Dictionary, but that doesn't mean that this counts as research experience in the sense that admission committees understand it.
@AdamPřenosil The first example under that dictionary's definition is "scientific/medical research," and most of the other examples are about academic research too. So "new" is not meant in the way you suggest. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/research
Here is a related question I asked https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182664/is-it-ethical-to-get-some-help-from-stack-exchange-for-my-research-as-a-phd-stud . Elements of the answer to your question can be found there :)
I agree with most everything in here, but just want to mention that problems/questions posted on the SE network have led to original research and papers, so it is not 100% binary, but it's pretty close. The mere act of engaging in the SE network does not count as research though.
No. In academia, research refers to a process whose goal is the creation of new knowledge - new for everyone, not just for you. The Stack Exchange questions that you are posting seem (by my cursory examination) aimed at improving your own knowledge and understanding of various subjects. While it is nice that you like learning and are using Stack Exchange for that purpose, this is not research. It also does not show anything about you that isn’t also true (in a readily apparent way) of 99% of grad school applicants. So mentioning this in your CV adds nothing in my opinion.
To be clear, some Stack Exchange posts contain genuinely new knowledge that would qualify as research. I have seen many such posts on MathOverflow for example, but they were all authored by professional mathematicians. Still, if you ever create that kind of knowledge, it would be worth mentioning.
And furthermore, if you ever create that kind of knowledge on Stack Exchange, then publish it in a peer-reviewed journal and get real credit for research.
@GEdgar I dimly remember reading a MathOverflow post that later got turned into published research by the author(s) - although how that works with copyright and so on given that it was already published I have no idea.
@Voo I can't speak to anything about academic publishing, but every SO/MO post is licensed by it's author under some form of CC BY-SA. So the author still retains the copyright to the post and can do whatever they want with the content, but anyone else can also build on it if credit is given. Assuming that their journal paper is more than just a copy/paste of the SO post, it'd be its own copyrightable work.
@Bobson In general most scientific journals want some rather exclusive license agreements in my experience, which I'd think clash with creative commons.
See https://meta.mathoverflow.net/q/617/454 for a listing of such published papers that started in MathOverflow.
@Voo Another example from Theoretical Computer Science Stack Exchange.
Contribution to SE is professional service, not research
Posting questions and answers on SE ---whilst a valuable professional service--- is not considered to be academic research. Questions and answers on SE are not peer-reviewed and do not usually involve the level of detailed study of a subject or novel contribution to a subject that would be accepted as academic research. Occasionally one will encounter answers on technical forums in SE that have some useful novel insight that might serve as the basis for an academic paper, but that would usually require much more development and a peer-review process before being counted towards research in an academic CV.
While the contribution of questions and answers on SE is not academic research, most universities will count substantial contributions on SE as professional service. Usually this would require posting high-quality answers rather than just posting questions, and a sustained contribution with relevant indicators of esteem (e.g., a high "reputation" metric, "people reached", etc.) would show that the contribution is substantial. For this reason, if you have made a substantial contribution to a relevant forum, and can show evidence of that through relevant metrics, it is acceptable to refer to such contributions on your CV or mention them in applications for admission or a funding application where relevant. This would be listed as a form of professional service rather than research. As to how this is perceived, that will differ according to who is reading your application --- some will consider this irrelevant and some will consider it something of value. As with anything you list on your CV, the main thing is to make a judgment about whether the item you are listing is of sufficient value to warrant inclusion.
For your particular case your own contribution to SE is relatively small (based on your present metrics) but you are only applying to a Masters program, so expectations for professional service would not be large. Your contribution of questions might act as an indicator of a modest amount of professional service and it could potentially illustrate your curiosity and interest in the discipline. High-quality answers are generally better than questions at illustrating existing knowledge, but high-quality questions can also be a valuable professional service. Speaking only for myself, I would not be put off by an applicant with your contribution listing this on their CV or resume, though it would be unlikely to move the needle. If you decide to list your contributions, do not list them as academic research, since that would be perceived negatively; instead list them as professional service and keep your contribution in perspective.
Thanks alot for your detailed and courteous advise. If comfortable, Can you please elaborate/explain"Speaking only for myself, I would not be put off by an applicant with your contribution listing this on their CV or resume, though it would be unlikely to move the needle much"
I see questions in the OP's profile significantly predominating over answers. Zero answers in top three sites. Not sure how questions amount to service worth mentioning.
@engr: Well, as George points out, you have a lot of questions but no answers on your top three sites. You have one "famous question" with 10k+ views on the signal processing site. That question is useful, and a very modest professional service (so I disagree with George slightly here), but it is not all that much in the scheme of things. At best your questions probably demonstrate curiosity in this field rather than a substantial amount of existing knowledge. Also, some might potentially read your questions as indicating even more of a lack of knowledge than if you had no postings.
Well, that depends on whether having this knowledge is being expected. Curiosity is good, bugging people online as a predominant way of "problem solving" is not. Quite a bit of nuance here. I would likely treat SE postings as a hobby in the context of a CV, unless the contributions are substantial enough for it to be called "public service". It also fits the narrative naturally if the committee happens to ask about the applicant's activities beyond the presented work.
1 I was recently involved in a hiring decision for a research/software engineer position in academia. The applicant listed their SO profile (in a section for links, along with their personal webpage and GitHub - which I think is better place then "service") and and the fact they gathered non-trivial reputation by answering questions here was certainly a plus, though not a huge deal.
One could describe this particular type of service as "outreach" as well.
Put it under Hobbies
Having an active SE account indicates you have a genuine interest on the topic. This is good to hear for admissions and should be included on your CV.
On its own however, SE is not research. It can of course be used for research purposes, to contact people in your field, and ask questions related to a research project. But in that case you should put the project itself on the CV and not just your SE account.
I will add that an applicant with many good answers on their account looks better than an applicant with many questions. This suggests they are not only interested, but are also able to communicate well with others.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.441693 | 2022-11-13T09:43:24 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/190539",
"authors": [
"Adam Přenosil",
"Baloo",
"Ben",
"Bobson",
"Cameron Williams",
"DSP_CS",
"GEdgar",
"George White",
"GoodDeeds",
"Greg Martin",
"Lodinn",
"Martin Modrák",
"Oliver882",
"Voo",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115846",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/122238",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/145124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/153751",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/155910",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26495",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6130",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68109",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
187400 | What is the upper age limit for a master's degree program in Germany?
I have a bachelor in electronics engineering, and I am 32 years old. I belong to a South Asian country and I want to apply for a master's degree program in Germany. But am I agewise eligible?
I have tried to explore different master's degree programs on https://www.daad.de/en/, but I couldn't find any information about an age limit.
Other than funding issues, some countries are reluctant to issue student visas to older applicants.
The question is tagged funding, but the text does not mention this. Is funding (from the university / German government) a requirement for you?
There is no age limit for studying in Germany. In fact, it is not that uncommon for students to be as old as you (or even significantly older) when starting or continuing with university. A C1 language level might often be a requirement, though.
EDIT: As the question is tagged "funding" (which I did not notice when first answering), I want to add: on the DAAD website, there is some information on requirements for scholarships. They state that in most cases, there is no age limit for scholarships either, but in some cases there is a maximum amount of time that is allowed to have passed since the last degree (e.g. maximum of 5 years after the completion of the BA at the time of application).
There are quite a large number of Masters in many subjects taught in English, as well, if German is a problem
He's asking about FUNDING though, i.e. scholarships. A lot of them do have age limits.
The question is tagged funding, but funding and scholarships aren't mentioned in the body or title.
As an example, the "information systems" master at the Technical University of Munich is completely in English - no C1 German language level necessary.
Note that Germany has wide-reaching anti-age-discrimination laws which I believe (IANAL) would apply to all funding opportunities as well as the masters itself.
@JackAidley I believe that you can sue your way into a study program (people have already sucessfully done that), but not into funding, as this is not universally available in the first place (only to a select few).
Definitely no age limit for most places - we have students in their 50s.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.442604 | 2022-07-30T13:33:24 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/187400",
"authors": [
"Cribber",
"Jack Aidley",
"Sursula",
"cag51",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/133549",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/138296",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5614",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69667",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85475",
"shoover",
"smheidrich",
"xngtng"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
37884 | Is it OK to add extra paragraph to a paper during the proof stage?
My math paper recently got accepted and I was told that I will be sent a proof soon. It's just four lines I want to add.. is it OK to add it to my paper? It's additional explanation of something, and I would tell the editor about it.
But is it commonly done or done at all?
Ask the editor in charge of your article.
Related: What corrections can you make on galley proofs?
In general no. There may be some circumstance when it can be necessary but the proofing stage is too late for any substantial changes. The manuscript should be published in the form it has been accepted and it is an authors responsibility to provide a final version of the manuscript which ideally should not require any changes once type-set and provided in the form of a proof. Changes that are acceptable are changes that do not in any way change the science of the paper.
If any major changes are done to the paper at proofing, the editor will likely decide whether or not these are permissible. What would happen if anyone tries to push substantial changes altering the core science of the paper probably varies, but in the worst case the paper might have to undergo new review.
It is not uncommon to make some changes to articles while they are in press. However, there are a couple of things you should be aware of. First, you ought to contact the editor, to find out whether there is time to insert anything. After a certain point, the publication schedule will probably not permit any changes. After that point, the editor may be willing to delay your paper until a later issue, or they may not.
The second thing, which is more specific to mathematics, is that the editor may not want to make any change that involves the actual mathematics without sending the article back to the referee(s). Mathematics journals have good reason to be very picky that every symbol and argument that appears in a final publication has been subject to the proper peer review. Additional background or explanatory material will probably be fine, but any change to how you calculate or prove something may not be possible without additional refereeing.
I think your first sentence is wrong. It's definitely uncommon, although there are exceptions.
In general, whenever scientist is exposed to their paper, they tend to improve sth:). However, it definitely delays publication and proof stage is to check that no errors were introduced to the content, NOT for changing the content
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.442824 | 2015-01-30T15:40:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37884",
"authors": [
"Aasish Kr. Sharma",
"Arata Kaizaki",
"Bill Barth",
"Cape Code",
"Danyal",
"E.P.",
"Javahelp",
"al_b",
"guest",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103177",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103178",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103184",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103185",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103191",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5963",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/820"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
34589 | When should I send thank you letter or email to my thesis committee members?
When is the proper time to send a thank you email to the committee members? After the defense or after getting the certificate confirmation from the registrar office? To me saying thank you after defense is such a nice gesture. I just had a long conversation and question-answer session and everything is still so fresh in the mind of the members! But I would like to know about your suggestion (and probably would like to go with that too!).
After the defense will be fine since by then the committee members have completed their job. What happens between that and when you have the final paper work done is irrelevant. Pointing at the discussion you have just had and finishing with a few personal comments/reflections will be fine. But, do not overdo it since long and talkative mails can be either too long to read or in the worst case seem constructed. So be yourself and be happy for what you have achieved ( I take it you will or have passed?)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.443094 | 2014-12-20T08:33:38 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/34589",
"authors": [
"HomoTechsual",
"MichaelCarrick",
"Parisa",
"Safaa",
"TGostell",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94872",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94874",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94906",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94907",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94910",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94915",
"kevin",
"user94874"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
177754 | When you find endorsement in an arXiv, is it certain to get the research published?
I read some questions on this platform and found that arXiv does not review research as in one of the questions here. Does this mean that the only obstacle to publishing the paper is endorsement only
Posting on arXiv is not publishing. You need to submit the paper to a journal and go through peer review to be published.
@astronat I know of course
Not exactly. There is a moderation process to weed out fakery and nonsense. It isn’t a full review though.
And as a preprint service, at least some of us don't consider uploading to arxiv as 'publishing'...
no, you 'acquire' copyright when you create the document.
If somebody hacks your computer and steals your unpublished great American novel and proceeds to publish it, well, they have violated your copyright and will be found liable. You take a (film) picture and have not developed it yet - you own the copyright regardless.
@DanRomik, a poor choice of words, I'll admit. But putting something on arXiv is publishing by the most common definition of the word (making generally available). It also supports a claim of priority (potentially) and gives you a way to defend against copyright infringement. That was my intention.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.443243 | 2021-11-08T16:48:37 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/177754",
"authors": [
"Buffy",
"Jon Custer",
"Mouhamade bel",
"astronat supports the strike",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/149043",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49043",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
184099 | How to improve quality of figures after reviewers have mentioned it?
The paper we are working on was accepted and we got a comment saying "Quality of Figures could be improved".
All the figures that are given have been exported from matplotlib and have all the standard labels with different color schemes and have attached the sample as well.
So what do I do? make it more pretty? or use a different package?
Note - This is just a sample, and the real one has a set of 6 plots big enough to fit in almost half a page
Not my area. Why does it look blurry?
Who said "Quality of Figures could be improved"? The editor, a reviewer, someone on the production team? Different people probably have different concerns, it might be something as simple as it needs to be exported in a higher dpi to meet journal requirements, or may be issues with clarity of labels or colour maps, or something more conceptual. (For example, for me, the labels are opaque and lack units or similar, but as I don't know your field maybe they're well understood in context.)
The "time" labels are inconsistent, and you probably need to increase the resolution.
I agree with the reviewer and with @Louic
The figure aught to be pixelated at the level the underlying data is pixelated. Do not listen to anyone who tells you to smooth it.
The axis labels should all be written out in full, with correct capitalization, and units. The tic marks should point out of the boxes so that they do not cover up the data.
There is no reason to use a different package. Plenty of room to improve the figure using matplotlib.
In addition to other comments, I would probably increase the font size, spell out "latitude" and "longitude", add units to all labels, and include tick and axis labels for the top panel. Also, is there any reason not to fill in the last panel on the bottom right by showing another time step?
If you decide to interpolate to increase the resolution, make sure to write down exactly what you did and to what extent you think you can trust the interpolation. Probably better not to do this though.
It should not be necessary to interpolate to increase the resolution. Simply making the image larger so that it ends up at 600dpi when printed should suffice. You should also check if the colour-scheme is suitable for the colour-blind.
Did the reviewers explain what exactly they want improved?
The illustration you provide seems like a standard plot that can be seen in most journals. That said, it can certainly be improved; many journals do not seem to care what they publish. What is acceptable also varies from person to person. There are however some standards that should be followed and your figure fall short on a few points. Many of the comments made to your post outline some of the improvements and I will also reiterate them here.
A figure should be understandable when shown without its figure caption. Your figure falls short of this. By understandable I do not mean the deep scientific significance of what is shown but to understand what is shown. This is a point made by Tufte (2001) and is a good guideline for finishing any figure.
Axis labels should include units. You have latitude and longitude which would be in degrees. The color scale is more problematic because I do not understand what it should be showing, units would obviously help.
Axis labels should start with capital letters so Lat/Lon or Latitude/Longitude.
The heading of the subplots containg a time stamp should be consistent. The ISO standard for date/time is yyyy-mm-dd HH:MM:SS. So I would suggest using this consistently or (which might be better for a more general audience) use an unambiguous date and time format such as "dd month, yyyy, HHMM hrs" (e.g. 29 April, 2022, 1200 hrs). The problem with date and time is that almost every country has their own standard.
The third diagram in the top row has no x-axis label and tick labels
The number of tick labels could be reduced so that the axes are not overloaded with information. Every second label can be removed while keeping the tick marks
The resolution of the coloured fields should reflect the resolution of the data shown in the fields. If the data is as coarse as it looks in the figure, then that is how it should be shown.
Figures must be made to work in their final size in the publication. Submitting vector based formats avoids many problems. When exporting to a bitmap one should consider the necessary resolution (in dpi) to make the illustration sharp in its final size. A figure such as yours that include bitmap fields should follow the same guidelines but obviously the fields in your subfigures will not change in apparent resolution as was stated in the previous point.
The data is latitude/longitude based running from c. 10 degrees N(?) to c. 80 degrees N(?). The width of the space between longitude lines will obviously decrease from S to N so that a square representation is not strictly correct. The plots are better representing reality if they are shown in some cartographic projection. This is clearly something many will ignore and maybe not even consider but it is one aspect to consider.
Any graphing package or software is not perfect. It is always useful to learn to use for example the open source Inkscape to edit standard output from plotting packages or software to optimse your graphics before publication.
Considering the colour scale I cannot see anything wrong. Aspects to consider regarding choice of colour scale include what is standard (if any), what may make sense depending on what is shown and what can be read by someone with colour blindness.
So there are several aspects that can be improved or at least considered. At the same time providing a comment such as the one you appear to have received without any exemplification of what to do is quite useless on behalf of the reviewer/editor.
Reference
Tufte, E.R. 2001. The visual display of quantitative information. Second Edition. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
The figures now are just a blob of colors with poor titles and bloated aspect. If you are an expert on the exact topic of your publication, you would be able to find the secret message hidden inside. So there is almost no advantage between having that figure and having a table showing the raw data: a figure serves exactly the opposite scope, make evident the messagge hidden behind data.
First) the colors. Why on Earth you have this mild but oversaturated range of colors if your scale is going symmetrically from +value to -value? these figures are figures that are hard to read, while figures should be popping out. There is simmetry, please have a strong contrast without saturation, no one sane of mind will look at your data in black and white, so you can use something like the RdBu scale (Red for positive, Blue for negative, white for zero)
Second) the colors. Why the colorscale is continuous, while the data seems not (yes, spatial discretization may play a role ... but what about resoultion of the measurments?)? and the scale truncated but not limited going from +32 to -32 ... please, use values readable from humans, like +30 to -30. Base 8 is nice, but leave it to your DAC sensors.
Third) the colors. They carry an overload of information, but what you want to show is "something". Please add some isolines in your plot (it is easy to do if the colorscale is a slightly desaturated RdBu instead of this very saturated colormap). And if the isolines have a label, plus dashed if negative and continuos if positive, you are good to go for the 1% of the world still printing papers and accessing papers only in black&white.
Fourth: the title must be in a standard format, whatever standard your peers are using, then please avoid writing "time": either it is obvious that it is a timestamp, or you have to find another format of timestamp. Do not strive making your best to be as concise as possible. Just be concise.
Fifth (bonus) if you use a lighter colormap, you can plot the grid with some dashed lines, to improve readability.
Example of colormap:
(taken from here, please note that all the text in this figure is bad, that the grid is not plotted but at least colormap and isolines are what would make much better your figures)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.443419 | 2022-04-10T09:13:49 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/184099",
"authors": [
"Andrew",
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Anyon",
"Louic",
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"Stephen McMahon",
"Yacine",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128244",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/140175",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17254",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47727",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64075",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70958"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
196895 | Should one (if possible) report Professors for plagiarism
It has come to my attention, that some of the professors I studied with as an undergraduate, plagiarized their lectures.
In some cases, it was word for word. In fact, they did not even explain it any better or add anything, merely translating or in some cases just copying the original text.
The books in question were not cited as a source for the lecture, rather as a suggestion of additional "literature" for the lecture, most of the time, among many other suggestions, and not on top of the list.
I reside in Germany.
Short answer: no unless the instructor claimed the material as their own “creation”. In fact in some situations sticking to one or few textbooks - which presumably have been proof-read and edited by professionals - is an entirely acceptable option.
It is not clear whether the professor has used lecture notes to produce some "publication" or whether the lecture follows something published. Either way, I do not see any issue!
There is no expectation that lectures consist only of original work. (Otherwise, most of us lecturing would be doing a very poor job). Embedding others' works and good examples is just part and parcel of creating good lectures. If I prepare lectures, I often read many books and some journal articles. When it comes to writing the slides, I would have difficulties finding the correct attributions. After years of teaching the material, the provenance of the material taught can become difficult to reconstruct.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.444344 | 2023-06-03T15:07:46 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/196895",
"authors": [
"Peter Jansson",
"ZeroTheHero",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/90441"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
5902 | Research approach for PhD thesis in Taoism: top down vs. bottom up
Originally I conceived of posting a "Roadmap for researching x" but I assume that would be too localized for this site.
Background: After much dilly-dallying, I have finally zoned in to pursue lifetime in Taoist research. I have studied mathematical philosophy, cultural anthropology, symbolic logic and enrolled in Eastern studies class for next semester. I understand the professor for latter class would be an excellent source of reference but currently semester is closed.
Problems facing: As I learned in English class it is important to take copious notes during research even if it means 24 hours so I am currently photographing everything that pertains to Taoism. But due to the complex nature of the subject itself and the concept of wu-wei, action in non-action, I am unsure as to how to approach research. I understand if I pursue degree in this field I should familiarize myself with the language and journals and pretty much everything that is related to it. This brings me to my original point:
Question: What would be a good strategy to do research on Taoism? Do I conceive of a thesis and work downwards from it? Or do I start from the scratch - so to speak- and bootstrap my way to a knowledge base. Problem with latter and given the complex nature is if I start with no thesis, then it would be an aimless wandering. But- then again, isn't that what Taoism is all about?
EDIT: In lieu of JeffE's comment below I am rephrasing the original question:
During a research, is it a good idea to start with a working thesis as early as possible?
You're presenting a false dichotomy. One does not work only bottom-up, nor does one work only top-down. Rather, one balances between the two approaches, first pursuing one and then the other, as the sun pursues the moon. The Tao moves in endless cycles.
You are quite right. I wanted to also add: "or both". I am editing the question in light of the comment.
In general, I agree with JeffE. Both top down and bottom up.
In the case of Taoism, there is more - how proficient is your Chinese?
You said pursue lifetime in Taoist research. I am not sure you can do that without knowledge in Chinese language equivalent to at least masters degree in Chinese.
Taoism is rooted from Laozi's original text Daodejing. Reference Taoism. Most native Chinese speakers do not understand that text. If you want to conduct life time research in Taoism, that book is a must read and must understand. Without fully understanding that text, you are at best a second class researcher in Taoism.
I am a native Chinese speaker. How much do I understand the text? Less than 5%. If I spend 20 years or more on it, I might be able to understand 80% of it. Actually, I am bluffing. Some people contribute his whole life in it and then claimed that he only understood less than half.
Somebody pointed to me after reading my answer that I should have used "proficient" instead of "fluent". I am not sure. Would anyone provide opinion?
Fluent is normally used for conversation (as it 'flows') proficient would be more appropriate in your context. That said, your point is an excellent one. Understanding the subtleties of a key work takes amazing language skills and the effort for that should not be under-estimated.
I can't help at all specifically on the Taoism part, but as an answer to your final question:
During a research, is it a good idea to start with a working thesis as early as possible?
You are talking about a thesis, and posting here, so I presume you want to do research in academical environment.
In my experience, you have Bachelor and Master years for establishing a broad knowledge base and identifying your interests.
Once you start as a PhD student, you get a research topic, but since it is research, it is subject to changes. The topic was defined before you actually immersed in the subject, so while you are working towards that goal while pursuing your thesis, the goal can change as you learn new things.
Oh, and you really don't need to familiarize yourself "with the language and journals and pretty much everything that is related to it" before pursuing a degree.
Note: The precise names of stages and the line between broad and focused research might be different elsewhere, but I think both phases should exist. In case you're aiming to start directly at a "focused research" phase, my (subjective) advice would be to take some time before to do some broad research on your own.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.444508 | 2012-12-21T23:42:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5902",
"authors": [
"Anish",
"Blue7",
"DatamineR",
"David Brown",
"Ian",
"JeffE",
"Jonas Bötel",
"Magnus Metz",
"Math Nerd",
"Nobody",
"Sarwan",
"Sean Vieira",
"Sniper Clown",
"XK47",
"earthling",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15284",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15285",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15286",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15294",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15295",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15297",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15298",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15316",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15343",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15352",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15353",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44706",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/996",
"user50831"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
158319 | will a lab feel deterred from hiring me if my undergrad thesis is in a different subfield?
i've interned at the same lab for two summers, and they highly encouraged me to apply for a research assistant position in the spring. however, i am concerned that they will not hire me based on my undergrad thesis topic.
the lab focuses on developmental neuroscience. i conducted research in the neuroanatomical etiology of autism spectrum disorder in children during the school year. but, my senior neuroscience honors thesis is on neuropolitics, technology, and radicalization. i love developmental neuro, but i'm fascinated by neuropolitics as well, and i was wondering if these dual interests are a deterrent at this point in my career.
any feedback is welcome and of help.
Since you have some history there, it seems very unlikely that such a thing would be a detriment. In fact, it might be viewed as positive that you aren't "too narrow" in your education and outlook.
But, it is up to them and you only learn by applying.
And picking a topic for such a narrow reason as obtaining a short term internship would be, I think, a mistake.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.444887 | 2020-10-31T18:13:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/158319",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
160783 | Presenting skills in a presentation for a PhD position
I've got invited to a PhD interview in the field of computational physics. In the invitation mail I was told, among other things, that I should present my skills for about 5min. It is my first interview and I'm quite unsure how I design this part of the presentation. I thought about presenting the main skills for the position, where I learned them and where I could use them so far. But I don't know how to design the slides for this part. I would assume that it is pretty boring to simply listing them or shouldn't I do any slide at all for this part?
Thank you for any help and suggestions in advance!
If in doubt about such things it's always okay (and in fact strongly advisable) to ask the place that invited you!
Perhaps you should organize it around things you have done and then mention the skills it took to accomplish that. Projects undertaken, research done, ...
Some things are more nebulous. Do you read a lot in the field, and take (and organize) notes, for example. What have you written? What sorts of organizational skills were required for that?
Organize like crazy, five minutes will fly by. You want to leave your audience with a sense of your style and maybe an interesting nugget.
You should have a slide or a few slides and you should not be worried about a list being boring. They specifically asked for this list! What they want to know is whether you know enough to hit the ground running and complete a project. The content is what matters and will be interesting to the audience.
There are ways you can make a "list" slide more visually interesting, if you want to do this. For example, you can have each new bullet appear as a pop up as you advance the slides. A slightly more advanced version is to "blow up" the new bullets so they are larger or "zoomed in", but keep the old bullets on the same slide in a smaller font.
Anyway 5 minutes is a lot less time than you think. I would not focus on "where you got the skills" -- that will take time from describing your skills. But, you should try to be as specific as possible about what your level of experience is. Reread the ad for the position and play up any experience you have that is related to the description (use the same words if you can).
Since it is a computational physics position, here's an example of the bullets I might make for a slide (I am completely making up at the kind of experience you might have)
Research / problem solving experience
Completed project P and produced result R
Skilled at debugging and testing my code
Independent problem solver and worker [I would include this and the previous bullet in some form, and you do want to give an example for both]
Computing experience
Proficient in X, Y, Z languages
Used A, B, C software packages in projects
Limited experience with version control
Run several jobs on a cluster for a research project
Relevant courses
Computational physics
Python programming
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.445022 | 2021-01-03T09:10:44 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/160783",
"authors": [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39510",
"user2705196"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
2356 | Salary determinants for faculty at public schools in the US
A follow-up question to this as I feel it is very broad. For example, consider this link displaying the salaries at a particular department in a public school in US.
I see very wide variations within assistant professors. Some assoc. profs earn lesser than asst. profs; people of the same age earn differently and so on. So, my question is, which of the following factors influence salaries at public schools and how?
Age
Experience as a faculty member
PhD at a top school
Number of years after undergrad/PhD
Experience at another school (Does a Stanford faculty with 5 years exp. moving to a public school earn more than a faculty member at the same school for 5 years?)
Number/Impact of publications
Any other factor
Given all data is in public, I assume there can be no pay negotiations, so is it possible to determine one's salary in advance before the interview process itself?
Which factors influence salary ? All of them.
There are indeed negotiations, despite the fact that the data is public. It's impossible to determine one's salary in advance. Some public universities have fixed salary scales, which sound like they should determine the salary, but they don't. (There's always some flexibility about which step on the scale one should be hired at, and there are usually further adjustments that are possible. This is by design, since nobody believes a fully deterministic system could work well.)
In addition to @eykanal's list, there are several factors that can lead to salary variance even within a single department:
Negotiating ability — Some profs are simply better at negotiating for better salaries than others, even with comparable publications, funding, students, teaching evaluations, etc. Conversely, some people have lower salaries simply because they don't realize they can ask for more.
Time in the department/time since PhD — All else being equal, the longer you've been here, the higher your salary. But as usual, all else is never equal. In particular, faculty hired with more post-PhD experience are generally paid more.
Performance — In most departments, faculty are reviewed annually, if only very lightly, to make sure we're doing our jobs. Salary is one of the few levers that department chairs have to reward faculty who are doing exceptionally well, or motivating faculty (especially with tenure) who aren't (seen to be) pulling their weight.
Offers from other institutions — This is one of the biggest sources of salary jumps. If a valuable prof in your department starts getting offers from other places, you department is very likely to raise their salary to keep them.
Administrative bonuses — Faculty who hold significant administrative positions (like associate head, or chair of the undergraduate program) often get a salary boost.
Variance in the job market — New assistant profs are generally hired at the prevailing salary rate for new assistant profs. Departments do not collaborate explicitly, but information does flow through applicants who get multiple offers. For example, about 10 years ago, a top-rated US CS department (not mine) decided to significantly increase its salary offers to new profs, to gain a strategic advantage over other departments. It didn't work; other departments (including mine) just raised their offers to compensate. It took several years to correct the resulting salary inversions.
Variance in university budgets — When times are good, faculty get raises. When times are not so good, faculty don't get raises. These times do not necessarily align with fluctuations in market rates.
Intramural politics — Academics are human, and subject to human failings. Everyone who reaches a position of power arrives with their own agenda; sometimes that agenda favors certain people or groups over others, for reasons that are more personal than objectively fair. In some departments, fights over limited resources can be ugly and brutal ("because the stakes are so low"); sometimes that ugliness is reflected in salary differences.
Do you have thoughts on how to negotiate well, particularly within academia? It's easy to find articles on the web about "how to negotiate", but are there specific wrinkles for academics that these articles often miss?
Also: Other people in the department. For example, some departments may be mindful of what their female vs. male faculty are paid, etc.
In the US, everything you list above—and more—can affect salary. (Do note that, in the US, age discrimination is illegal. Not that it doesn't take place anyway...) The only thing I'm not sure of is "number of years as a PhD", that's more of a proxy for "work done during PhD tenure", which is included in the impact factor.
A few factors I thought of, not likely exhaustive:
Masters/PhD/postdoc alma mater
Masters/PhD/postdoc advisor
Number and quality of publications
Grant history
Existing grants
Collaboration history
Teaching experience
Field of research (psych vs history vs engineering vs etc)
Type of institution (public/private)
Economic environment (budget cuts in state funding, etc)
Teaching load
Location (Dallas, TX vs Palo Alto, CA vs etc)
...?
Note location may not be your location. For example, professors at WSU (WA, USA) enjoy relatively high salaries because professors at UW need higher salaries to afford Seattle.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.445381 | 2012-07-09T06:54:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2356",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"B B",
"Dan C",
"Fomite",
"Karen",
"Nelson Reis",
"Suresh",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1069",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5884",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5886",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
1887 | Is "working from home" a bad thing in academia?
Is it a bad thing in academia if a student works from home? Missing department talks and seminars is obviously bad, but in case a student is pursuing a problem alone and he feels comfortable researching at home, is it viewed negatively? At times the time spent on travel and a crowded lab may disrupt one's flow of thoughts, so in those cases home provides an edge.
Is physical attendance deemed important by the department as long as they are kept in the loop regarding your progress?
Most likely, there is now difference between academia and jobs like programming, graphical design, editorial work, etc. So general advices + http://productivity.stackexchange.com/ should apply. What does make the question academia-specific?
@PiotrMigdal Because it is. One of the hallmarks of academia is occasional flexibility, and there is a world of difference between academia and freelancing/contract work ala editorial work or graphic design.
@EpiGrad For 'normal jobs' there is whole spectrum from 'you have to work a home' to 'you have to do all work-related things in the office'. Without a further specification, the answer will not differ much for one for a specific non-academic job.
@PiotrMigdal True, but first it's not just a productivity question, but a cultural one, and second, academic work is just different at times. I've worked as both a freelance creative professional and a grad student - the problems and choices are different, even if the desk layout ends up the same.
@EpiGrad Now I see it, thx.
See also: http://academia.stackexchange.com/q/7698/1033
The answer is it depends - both on the student and the culture of the department.
There are of course some situations where working from home is impossible - graduate programs that are heavily lab based come to mind. Below is a summarization of my thoughts from a more data analysis driven field, having done both.
Positives
Lots of departments these days don't have lots of graduate student space. While some labs might have dedicated bench space, and there may be an RA/TA office or two, there's not "a place" where students can work anyway, which makes "is it bad to work from home" something of a moot point.
Working from home benefits certain work styles. If you're the kind of person who prefers to work in a spread out, sprawling fashion, with multiple monitors, tons of stacks of paper, and a whiteboard or two, that's just not feasible in most grad student offices, even when they do exist. And when the only spaces that exist are transient ones, like shared desks or cubicles, library study areas etc. you also can't customize your work space at all - and expensive textbooks and laptops are theft bait.
It facilitates more flexible schedules. Universities tend to be closed at 3:00 AM. I tend to do my best work at around that time. This seems to be relatively common in academia, and as academia seems to promote an "always working" lifestyle, having a single centralized space you have access to 24 hours a day is nice.
Negatives
You do lose out on departmental interactions somewhat. The concern about missing seminars is I think a bit of a non-issue. Those are easy to miss when you're working on site, and can be attended with just a little bit of diligence on the part of someone working from home. What I've found missing more is the transient, passing in the hallways interactions. I realized, for example, one day that I had gone several weeks without talking to anyone about my field. That's not good. It also does some harm to cross-polination and ideas from unexpected places.
It can get lonely. Seriously, this seems to be a major challenge. It's possible, and the workload sometimes promotes, just disappearing into a cave.
It's possible to get distracted, as it always is working from home. "Real life" has infinitely many things to take care of, and its much easier to defend "work time" if you're at an office. But then unless you have an office its easy to get distracted in a department where your friends and colleagues are around.
Overall, I wouldn't say its bad. I know successful academics who work almost entirely in their office, and who work almost entirely from home. I'd say the best way to promote on-site work, if a university is trying to accomplish that, is not to focus on the bad parts of working from home, but on addressing what makes it appealing. I finally moved entirely to a working from home setup because I got tired of "work" involving camping out in cramped spaces, without the materials I needed, fighting for power outlets.
As for whether or not your physical presence is important to the department - it depends on the department. I've known some who don't care as long as you show up to what you need to, and others that absolutely want you there, and subtly penalize those who aren't around.
As this relates to students, I feel it is extremely bad to work from home regularly. Being a grad student is not about being efficient, or even learning to be efficient. It is about learning your subject area and making contacts. Working from home means you miss interactions with your colleagues. You will be judged by your senior collegauges both in terms of your productivity and percieved work ethic. No department sets out to hire people who they know will predominately work from home.
Not necessarily. With the way that some departments are rapidly running out of physical real estate, they may even appreciate students who chose to work in their dormitories, homes, or libraries. (Of course, there is a barrier where one's work needs to be able to be performed at those locales, which of course rules out lab-based works in the experimental sciences.)
When I was a graduate student the department actually sent out an e-mail to all students asking students who intend to work mainly from somewhere apart from the department building to declare their intention so that they can more efficiently assign (the very limited) office spaces. But this was in a math department and eccentricity seems to be more tolerated there.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.445780 | 2012-06-05T06:21:50 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1887",
"authors": [
"Fomite",
"Piotr Migdal",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
170524 | What should I do if I have found a major error after a year of postdoc work?
After my PhD, I continued with a postdoc in my PhD lab. The topic and the numerical method was quite different than my PhD and I had to read up quite a bit of literature to start the new work. However, as I was also involved in other projects as well, I took around nine months to complete the work. While writing the paper, I have discovered that I have done a major mistake in my simulation parameters and model. The work cannot be published unless I correct the mistakes and run the simulations again which would take at least a month more.
I was asked to submit the manuscript for review by the advisor and other collaborators by next week. However, now I can't write the paper with the errors. And I have to rerun the entire work again.
What do I do now? I am almost a year into my postdoc, and I shouldn't have made such errors. How do I approach this and what do I tell my advisor and collaborators?
The situation obviously isn't ideal, but there doesn't seem to be much we can help with. There aren't many ways to say "I found a mistake and I need more time to redo some of the work", and it seems like you already know you need to let the other people know and fix the mistake. Based on your title, I assumed the error you found invalidated the entire year of work (or your PhD). Simply having to take a bit longer doesn't seem like a huge deal (unless you'd miss a once-a-year deadline or something, but you still wouldn't really have options). Also note: your advisor is there to advise you.
Bad news doesn't get better with age, so don't delay in letting people know what's going on. But, speaking from experience, this kind of news is not as bad as you think (you found the error even before your collaborators even saw the paper!). In a few months, people will not remember this.
If the mistake you found was a natural mistake, and the finding of the mistake reflects deeper knowledge gained over the course of the year, perhaps that part of the research could be salvaged. Good papers have been written dissecting bad models.
If you find a mistake now, that's a lot better than finding it later after everything has been published, as then you would have to go through some rigmarole of withdrawing the article and so on.
could you throw more computing power at running your simulations? Might not be cheap but this is an ideal use case for cloud computing (assuming your simulations are parallelisable).
Sometimes when coding software, I would later discover that my discovery of an error was itself an error. So first I would say be sure you indeed have an error.
It's always best to find errors as early as possible. You've found this one before rather than after publication, so that's a big win. There's nothing magical about any step in one's academic career that makes them immune to making errors: everyone makes mistakes, no matter how many degrees they have or years of experience or papers they've published. It's a fair bet that the most senior researchers have made the most errors, simply by having had more time to accrue them.
Let your advisor and collaborators know what happened, and start running the corrected simulations as soon as possible. If you can update them with a timeline of when it would be feasible to submit the new results, then do so.
They may be disappointed by the delay, but they'll prefer this rather than having their names on a paper with a fundamental flaw.
I think this is the best advice you will get. You have to "fess up" and do it over. Science is hard and not all tries lead to success. If it were easy, then no one would want to pay us so handsomely to do it. Research is fundamentally looking into the unknown.
"So that's a big win" - excellently put. The error didn't make it into publication. Note that Michael Atiyah, one of the mathematics greats of our time offered a flawed proof of Riemann. It happens to the best of us. If you can fix it by just one month more work, that's another win, not every error can be fixed that way.
@Captain: Let me (in part because of my deep esteem for Atiyah) suggest a more purely inspirational story: Andrew Wiles first announced a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem in 1993. This proof was (valuable but) wrong. In 1994 he fixed it. Thus one of the most lauded mathematical achievements of our lifetime was done wrong before it was done right.
@PeteL.Clark Indeed, good example. It was not at all out of disrespect to Atiyah, but to demonstrate to OP that errors are possible and part of the endeavour. Einstein had several wrong versions of general relativity before he got it right. We do not know of what category OP's errors were, but integrity, honesty and trustworthiness is the highest capital of a scientist, and fixing a recognized error is part of that.
Sadly I've met many researchers of the mind that it's better to find the error after publication. This way they get to publish two papers instead of one: one paper with the error, and one paper to fix it.
@Stef do these types not think it looks bad in the long run? If someone looks up such a professor, wouldn't they notice that quite often they're publishing fixes to papers they rushed? And not truly publishing new papers each time?
I fortunately can not claim to know any such researchers as @Stef describes. If I did, I would also have lost respect for them a long time ago, and so would likely everyone around me.
@Stef In math, accumulating a reputation for rushed results will become a major problem for the particular scientist. In other topics, not so much. Nonetheless, it's in the end about r/K selection. Each scientist needs to ask which one do they want to be?
@BruceWayne I guess? I don't know. I assume that depends on the domain, and the kind of error, and the frequency at which this happens. I would guess it's also different between journal papers, with a rolling submission process, and conference papers, with a deadline.
@CaptainEmacs The example of Wiles is in a very, very different ballpark from the example of Atiyah (who also claimed short "proofs" of Feit-Thompson, complex structures on $S^6$, etc.).
@Carl-FredrikNybergBrodda Indeed, it was Pete who mentioned Wiles, I originally didn't, because a reasoning close to yours, but forgot about that when I agreed with Pete.
@CaptainEmacs I think you misunderstand me. I don't think that the Atiyah example is a good example for illustrating mathematicians being incorrect and offering flawed proofs as part of their working lives.
@Carl-FredrikNybergBrodda Ok, I didn't get that. I think it is an example where probably overconfidence played too strong a role, but I still think it is relevant to OP.
This happens, and you just have to deal with it. A year and a half ago, I discovered a mistake I had made only after spending approximately 15 CPU years on computations. It led to a delay of about 6 months in the paper, during which every core of my collection of computers was busy recomputing the statistics I needed -- but at least I had confidence in the correctness of the submitted material.
In practice, the delay is often not terrible because only the computer is working on re-doing all of the calculations. While it's doing that, you can focus on the next research project, and once you have the new numbers, whatever little work is necessary to adjust the tables and graphs in the paper. In other words, little work is wasted, just time.
I have made plenty of mistakes in my career. Some real doozies. And I have been witness to many mistakes made by colleagues. I have found that confessing to the mistake and accepting blame and responsibility turns out the best. Even in cases where blame could be shared if you accept blame, apologize, and be honest it works out better. People will tend to attack someone who is defensive and tries to blame others. That's when they really pile on. Sure they will be frustrated and disappointed. But if they see that you feel bad and are working to fix it, they will have more sympathy and be more on your side.
There are already several good answers to the broader question, I just wanted to focus on the run-time aspect:
The work cannot be published unless I correct the mistakes and run the simulations again which would take at least a month more.
I was asked submit the manuscript for review by the advisor and other collaborators by next week. However, now I can't write the paper with the errors. And I have to rerun the entire work again.
Not knowing the nature of your work, I have no way of knowing whether this is an impractical suggestion, but - is it possible to reduce the rerun time by parallelising your workflow? For instance, by asking your colleagues to run some of the simulations on their own computers, or renting some cloud computing time?
@carterjack, the community at stackoverflow would be eager to help optimize and speedup your processing. In addition to GeoffreyBrent's suggestions, a few broad ideas for your consideration are profiling your code execution, reducing memory overhead, optimizing loops and functions, and minimizing disk reads/writes.
There's a silver lining to your dark cloud, but only if you 'fess up: by admitting your mistake you are announcing to the world that you can be trusted and are a person of integrity, even under potentially embarrasing conditions.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.446326 | 2021-06-29T17:11:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/170524",
"authors": [
"Alan Birtles",
"Andrew",
"Bradley Thomas",
"BruceWayne",
"Buffy",
"Captain Emacs",
"Carl-Fredrik Nyberg Brodda",
"John Coleman",
"M.Viking",
"NotThatGuy",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Stef",
"Tom",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126851",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/140175",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142404",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142411",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53246",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/60253",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72815",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77932",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87984",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/92334",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
147004 | How can I tell if I'm making enough progress when working remotely?
I am starting a PhD abroad, but due to the COVID-19 pandemic I cannot leave my country at the moment. My advisor has agreed that I can work remotely (starting later is not an option). While we can Skype and most of my work can be done online, I am concerned that having no access to the department, not being able to attend seminars/workshops, and not being able to meet/talk to other students in person will put me at a big disadvantage.
I am keen not to spend these initial few months slacking off and want to catch any problems before it is too late. However, I have always found it difficult to judge my own progress when studying alone, and with a PhD it seems that it will be especially hard as I need to learn a lot of skills in a new area. Also, because my advisor seems like a very 'nice' person who does not demand that his students work very hard, I am concerned that he will not tell me if I am underperforming.
Would it be appropriate to raise this with my advisor, asking him to tell me if I am not doing as well as his students usually do? Or are there any strategies for people working from home to judge if they are doing enough?
I am also a PhD student working at home for two weeks now, as everyone else too. Your situation seems to be more special as you never really arrived and you seem to be quite far apart. But I can somehow relate, the research conversation, the talks/seminars, none of them anymore. But (what essentially I am doing now), take a few questions related to your research and write it down, in paper style. When you think you have finished something to a certain degree send it to your advisor. Discuss it, in skype, or by email. Keep things going! Keep your mind busy!
I work in theoretical stuff, so paper+pencil is all I need (+literature access). Might be harder when you have lab work to do. But maybe then focus on that what you can do at home/the more theoretical stuff.
Asking your advisor how you can improve and to help you find alternatives to whatever you're unable to access (the in-person contact, in this case) is usually better than asking how well you're doing. Never ask if you're not doing well (that's needlessly negative), and try to avoid asking how you compare against others. Your goal should only be to do as well as you can.
Yes, you should raise this issue, both with the advisor and with the university administration. Students need some feedback on their work and it is the university's responsibility to provide a way for that to happen. They need to provide the channels and you need to find a way to use them.
But things are in a bit of chaos now, of course, and effective response can be slow to occur.
Virtual seminars are possible using simple or sophisticated software. Perhaps you can set up (or the university can) a group of students and a professor or two willing to have an online session regularly. It isn't the same as face to face, but it can keep you engaged.
But at a minimum, write a lot and note where you have problems. Ask a lot of questions, but make sure they are pretty focused. Share what you write with your advisor, by email or by posting it somewhere.
Ask your advisor directly how you are doing and ask explicitly for next steps. You will most likely get suggestions about reading. Take a lot of notes on the readings and note things that puzzle you. Ask about them.
If you are starting the research phase of the degree it is normally a fairly solitary effort in any case, but the advisor should be willing to review and respond to your efforts and your questions.
Under the circumstances, I would not worry about whether you are working "enough".
Indeed, under these circumstances, many universities (in the US, anyway) are presuming that many students and faculty are unable to work effectively. For example, many universities have either changed all grades to pass/fail for the term (see here), or else are allowing students to switch to pass/fail grading until the end of the term. For faculty, many are delaying tenure clocks by a year (see, e.g. here).
If your advisor is usually reluctant to make demands, or tell people that they're underperforming, then he will be even more reluctant now. I don't think you can realistically have this conversation now -- it's up to you to set your own standards and work towards them as best you can.
But I would certainly recommend being in communication with your advisor: ask his advice; ask questions about whatever you're studying; discuss ideas for research projects; and the like.
One thing you might do is ask to have a regular weekly Skype meeting, where you talk about what you've been reading recently. This might help to keep you on task.
Best wishes!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.447114 | 2020-03-29T14:04:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/147004",
"authors": [
"NotThatGuy",
"StefanH",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68087",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77932"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
138021 | How should I tell a professor the answer to something he doesn't know?
Last year, I asked my physics professor a question that he did not know the answer to. This year, while doing a research paper, I also figured out the answer to the question I asked him. I want to send an email to my professor explaining the answer I found simply because he's a curious guy.
Typically, if I asked something that the professor didn't know, I'd email them a few days later saying:
Hi Dr. Professor, after some reading, I figured out the answer to why so-and-so happens. Here's what I learned.
But since it's been so long, he definitely doesn't remember what I asked him. So I'd like to remind him what my question was. However, writing:
"Hi Dr. Professor, last year I asked you a question that you did not know the answer to, and this year, I figured it out. Here's what the question was, and here's what I learned"
sounds a bit insulting to me, because I'm writing that he didn't know the answer. What is a good way to share an answer with a professor without being "insulting"? Am I just overthinking this?
Just a mini nitpick / quick heads up that "Hi Dr. Professor" would be a non-standard greeting. If in doubt, always stick to "Dear Professor X,". (Hello and hi usually work too but some professors would consider it too informal.)
@user2705196 in which country?
"Hi Dr. Professor" would definitely be unusual in North America. And most of Europe that I'm familiar with.
@user2705196 I think there's a chance that the OP was just using the word Professor as a placeholder for the person's surname.
Welcome to Academia.SE! You may want to check out these two Meta question and answers. (For context, meta.SE is where users can discuss the running of the stack overflow network. Discussion there often helps us moderators guide policy.)
Don't obsess over it. Just. Do. It.
Seeking, but not having an anwer to some things .... is that not a scientist's job?
Use "we". "We did not know the answer to."
@user2705196 I know this is a culture thing, but I can never understand how "Dear" is more formal than "Hello". It just feels too intimate to me, like I'm writing a love letter.
@Vaelus - Well, there's always "Esteemed." (You should see how formal letter greetings look in German! Priceless!)
@Buffy. Exactly. It looks like from many answers there that faculty staff are some kind of deities. The prof was interested, OP found the answer - a simple email is great.
I'm dumbfounded by these answers. Not one says to ASK HIM OR HER! "Dear X, this is Y, do you recall we were discussing Z? Since that time I found an interesting solution, would you like me to forward it to you?"
I think there is an easy way to phrase this to make it tactful, after all professors are often curious about learning new things too!
"Hello Professor X,
I hope you've been well! Last year I asked you a question and we couldn't figure it out at the time but I've since come across an interesting answer and just wanted to pass along the info just in case you're curious. We were discussing Y ... "
I would suggest to replace 'last year I asked a question' with 'last year we discussed a question/[or problem]..'
I would also open with a compliment. Something like "Dear Professor X, I really enjoyed your classes last year....", then go on to mention the question and answer. This will serve to positively frame your question.
Depending on the professor, you might also say something like "You've probably already found the answer, but I only just discovered that explains it and wanted to share it with you just in case."
Depending on the field and on the person, even a basic compliment like "I enjoyed your classes" would be too much and considered a waste of time. And "you've probably already found the answer" could even sound rude to some (as if your question was supposed to be important). I especially look the maths/CS and physics way :)
If you're going to take 3 lines before getting to Y I hope you mention Y in the subject. Being nice is one thing but get to the point.
I agree with Greg. It's good to be polite, but not good to be self-disparaging. Treat your professor as an equal and they will respect you in return. The suggestion in this answer is good, but the comments are way overboard.
As an alternative to Juan's answer (roughly in the same spirit), I suggest that you can phrase the email regarding the issue itself--since presumably the professor would also be interested in knowing the answer to the problem. Something like the following should suffice.
Hi Professor XY, recently I learnt about [...], which seemed really interesting to me because [...]. If you recall, this is similar to what we discussed a while ago regarding ABC, which is what prompted me to look into this further. I thought I would send this to you in case you happened to be interested in it. Have a nice day!
The point is to focus on the part which the professor would also be curious about/interested in, and to not dwell on the fact that they weren't aware of the answer beforehand.
I find this answer more tactful than the chosen one.
@RuiFRibeiro While I agree, I think perhaps the professor would be more likely to dismiss this version because it starts with discussing the new information without indicating why this would be relevant to the professor, so it may only make sense if the information discussed is implicitly of interest to the professor.
The polite way to do this in academia is to pose it as a question. This way, you show your humility. You acknowledge that the solution or answer you found might be flawed or incomplete. Also, you open yourself up to collaboration.
This is a great answer. I totally agree that it makes sense to phrase a solution as a question not just for politeness but for scientific reasons because there'll often be a discussion about whether the solution actually answers the question!
I think this is unnecessary. The OP is saying that much later he/she discovered an answer to a question that both admitted not knowing at the time. There is no reason for humility. It would be different if the prof was put on the spot and the OP knew the answer.
@Cell - Humility is a habit. The person I have dealt with who had the most humility was my advisor -- and one might have thought he had the least need for it. But it was inherent to his character and his whole outlook on life.
I would say: pose it as a question if it is actually a question. If the OP is sure they've found the answer, and they are just sharing it to potentially satisfy the professor's curiosity, there's no reason to frame it as a question. Posing it as a question is the same as asking for a favor: to read through and verify the OP's solution.
"A few years (semesters?) ago we were discussing the issue of _____ and the specific problem that ______. I recently came across something that brought the topic back to me and discovered that ______. I wanted to share that with you and to see if you have heard of this as well."
This way you are making it something of mutual interest and still being respectful.
There are two risks here:
Sounding insulting (as you have noticed)
Being boring (by bringing up some trivial thing from a year ago)
You should avoid both, because there is nothing to gain from emphasizing them.
Dear [name], lately I've been working on my current [paper/research/assignment] and here's some updates on how that is going. We can talk in more detail in our next meeting.
Incidentally, I ended up learning [thing], which we had discussed in the past. It was interesting to find out that [implication].
I think this is a better answer than the accepted one because:
Doesn't remind the professor that he "didn't know" (if it's been a year since, you may even be remembering wrong and perhaps he did know)
Doesn't sound petty by referencing something from a year ago
Isn't wasting his time with some random thing that hasn't been relevant in a year
Sticks to relevant, pertinent things that matter to the work that's here and now, not ancient history
There is of course nothing wrong with discussing history. Sometimes there are unanswered questions that linger for decades or centuries before spurning great discoveries when their time comes. But a productive researcher should maintain focus on priorities. If this thing from a year ago was that important, a year ago wouldn't have been the last time you discussed it. So one has to wonder, if nobody's cared in a year, why should anyone start now? I think answering that question is the most constructive direction to go here.
I wrote the above assuming you have a relationship with the professor already. If you are talking about an undergraduate instructor, the same principles still hold, but a better example template could be:
I have decided to work on [problem], and I wanted to share my findings with you. I actually became interested in this problem due to a discussion we had during our [class]. I have found that [answer], which is [implications].
I would add a dimension:
The amount of time spending on the problem:
Your professor probably thought a few seconds / minutes about it
You probably spend minutes / hours and from your text
This year, while doing a research paper, I also figured out the answer
to the question I asked him.
it even sounds that it wasnt your main purpose to answer the question, but you found it while working on a research paper.
So you could include that in your text:
Last year we discussed an interesting question to which we didnt find the answer "ad hoc". I just wanted to inform you that i stumbled upon a clue towards the answer while working on a research paper. In case you are curious,....
I am XXX. Last year, we couldn't figure out(state the problem that the professor did not know the asnwer). While reading (State the source of your answer so he can refer to) this year, I realised(state what you found). I just thought it would be nice to share with you.
Kind Regards
XXX
Hi and welcome to Academia.SE! Could you please expand your answer to better explain your suggestion? As is, it may not meet the quality standards of the site.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.447581 | 2019-10-04T03:05:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/138021",
"authors": [
"Brian R",
"Buffy",
"Caleb Stanford",
"Cell",
"Jair Taylor",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Matthew Martin",
"NDEthos",
"Pharap",
"Randy Zeitman",
"Rui F Ribeiro",
"Vaelus",
"WoJ",
"aparente001",
"aslum",
"candied_orange",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10582",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109955",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/114394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14992",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15375",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15446",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34357",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39510",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42726",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44314",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44393",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49715",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5899",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/61135",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75206",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7705",
"lalala",
"rackandboneman",
"user2705196",
"usul",
"yo'"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
188460 | What should I do if a paper's theoretical justification isn't right, but the method based on that justification works?
This is a problem that comes up every now and then when I am asked to review a paper.
In my old field of research (robotics), papers straddled the line between creative problem solving and theoretically sound science. The general layout of all of the papers is to first provide a scientific reason that your method should work, and then present the method and any tweaks you had to make in order for the actual engineering problem to be solved.
Many times this led to a dubious scientific background and leaps of logic.
Here is an example: A paper might be about an algorithm to solve X problem. X is something that humans do naturally (for instance, grasping a delicate object without breaking it), so logically one would go to the scientific literature to find out how humans do it. The paper would then include a detailed and theoretically correct background section into the biology that governs human abilities. Then, the paper would include a big leap in logic that is not supported by the actual science, and that leap in logic would be used to justify their algorithm. Authors would state this leap as though it is an established scientific fact, when in fact the science is either unsettled or their conclusions are wrong about the biology.
The problem is that the algorithm does in fact work when tested on the engineering system (a robot, in our continuing example). It just doesn't actually have any significant resemblance to the biology that the authors claim it was based on. So really the issue isn't that the algorithm is a bad one or that the testing and data were fudged; it's that the justification of the design didn't follow from the evidence presented. If it weren't presented as though it was decided fact I wouldn't even think about it.
In addition, it is highly unlikely that, if I were to ask the authors to justify their results better, they would be able to do it—the science simply doesn't support it, but they tinkered with it enough that it works.
What would be an appropriate response here?
Coming in to Mechatronics (Engineering) I can tell you that there are orders of magnitude more examples of this to be found in design 'justification' in Architecture programs...
It's appropriate to respond just as you have here: criticize the unfounded motivation and ask that the authors present their paper without it. For example:
the authors suggest that humans and other great apes navigate diverse terrain using wheels, however the authors do not support this assertion with appropriate citations to the literature on human physiology, and it seems to conflict with evidence that apes in fact use legs. Therefore, while their horse-drawn wheeled cart does seem like a promising logistical solution, I recommend that they remove any suggestion that this solution is biologically motivated unless the authors can provide sufficient references for their assertions.
As a neuroscientist I must say I very much sympathize with this problem, and occur it regularly on other Stack Exchange sites as people confuse what is known and useful within artificial neural networks with what is known about biological brains and neural circuits. However, while it's understandable to encounter these issues among learners in a field, it's not something that should ever make it into published papers.
I've never personally encountered something like this (and it's pretty unlikely in my area), but I think it might make sense if the authors say that whatever algorithm they have is inspired by some biological phenomenon, even if there is no rigorous way to derive one from the other. This is of course very different from what OP seems to describe, which looks to me like bad, misleading science.
I want to point out that it's not just misleading science, but it has effects outside of academia as well, as someone can then go point to this robotics paper and claim chimps are doing wheelies in the jungle, and they would have gained some ethos doing so. The fact they would have a paper, that may even have a bunch of people citing it makes it hard for the people on the ground to argue against things that are not just speculative, but flat out wrong. We see this all the time with climate change.
For example, oten when we see this in climate change, since there's so many different disciplines working in the field, what actually happens is someone, working on something that will help reduce energy usage, or use clean energy, will say something about a prediction that was never said by an actual climate scientist or paper, and then climate change denialists will then go use that paper as a source for saying "See, obviously the world hasn't melted by 2020, so clearly all of this is bunk!"
I remember reviewing a paper about a database model for doing search and query on music. The problem was that the musicology was completely flawed, in fact it was essentially dreamt up in the researcher's head. But I was relying on my own extremely limited knowledge to recognise that. So the only thing I could really do was to tell the editors that the paper needed some expert musicological input.
I would just ask the authors to rewrite that part to ensure the science is correct, and state the algorithm is inspired by the biological aspects of human abilities.
This is how researchers in the bio-inspired (nature inspired) meta-heuristics research areas approach the problem; FYI, these researchers design algorithms that mimic biological processes.
See also: Genetic Algorithm - "a metaheuristic inspired by the process of natural selection"
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.448602 | 2022-09-06T17:41:32 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/188460",
"authors": [
"Krupip",
"Lamar Latrell",
"Michael Kay",
"Pharap",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10582",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26631",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38586",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39478",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97166",
"tomasz"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
63362 | Should authors omit statements / citations of well known results in response to referee requests?
I am asking this question to get further perspective on an issue that has come up with a student (undergraduate, mathematics) I am mentoring. At last summer's REU he wrote (in particular!) a solo paper. I was not directly involved with the research, but I gave him some feedback on the writing before he submitted it for publication a few months ago. He has now received a referee report, which is very positive and is of the sort that I would recognize as being 99% likely to lead to acceptance. The referee requests revisions, many of which I agree with.
However, one of the referee's suggestions is for the student to not explicitly state two well-known theorems that he is making use of. (In case it helps to know, these are Dirichlet's Theorem on primes in arithmetic progressions and Minkowski's Convex Body Theorem.) The referee follows up by saying that even if he does want to state them, he should not give citations to them, since they are so well known and google searches easily turn up references.
My questions:
(1) How would you respond to this referee request if you were the author?
(2) How would you advise a young student to respond to this request?
I have added a link to clarify the meaning of the REU acronym, which may be unfamiliar to readers. If I did not pick the intended meaning, feel free to revert the edit, but please insert a link to the intended explanation.
If it were my paper, I'd leave the citations in the paper, explaining to the editor the reasons for doing so, but adding that, if (s)he really insists on deleting them, then I'm willing to comply. That should remove the danger of getting the paper rejected over this minor issue. (The relevant insistence would be the editor's, not just the referee's.)
Are the citations to the originals or to textbooks?
@Noah: The citations are to number theory textbooks.
Three brief comments: 1) The fact that I know (roughly) what both those theorems say probably means that the intended readers of the paper really don't need their statements. 2) I find the referee's suggestion of giving an explicit statement without reference bizarre. More typical practice would be the opposite, in my experience. 3) I would advise the student to follow the referee's suggestion to leave out explicit statements (assuming my comment #1 is correct). It's just not important enough an issue to make a big deal out of.
One thing to keep in mind (although it need not apply here) is that it's sometimes necessary (and often helpful) to know the precise formulation of a well-known theorem that is used -- there can be subtle differences in assumptions and conclusions that would trip up a reader looking at the wrong formulation. For this reason, I tend to give references wherever I can, although I would only include the full statement (with citation!) if I a) expected that most readers would have to (or want to) look it up and b) wasn't already pushing the page limit...
I would recommend approaching a referees recommendation to drop a citation in the following manner:
First, consider carefully whether there is good reason to keep a citation in the paper at all. The key factors to consider are reading audience and the customs of others in the field. For example, in cross-disciplinary work I have often cited extremely basic material because core dogma known by every undergraduate in one field are sometimes viewed as nearly unbelievable statements in another field. On the other hand, students in particular are sometimes prone to over-citation because they have been well-trained in citation and decide to err on the side of caution.
If a citation is warranted, consider whether to use the primary source or a textbook source. Notation and interpretation change over the years, and for purposes of elucidating a well-known result, a readily accessible modern text is often a much better citation for the reader than a difficult to find or understand original. In certain cases, however, returning to the original is important: for example, the standard interpretation of the Turing test is different than what Turing originally proposed.
Whether the decision is to keep the same citation, change the citation, or drop it all-together, in responding to the referee one should explain carefully why one made that decision. I would be startled if a paper could be imperiled by deciding to keep a citation when a referee recommended dropping it---it's just such a minor issue, all things considered. With a careful explanation of how the choice has been reconsidered and the final decision, most referees are likely to be sufficiently satisfied, even if they might have chosen differently.
Bottom line: no paper is going to be put in peril by a few extra citations as long as the author is reasonable in explaining their decisions. The citations might ultimately get dropped or not, but in every case we are talking about "minor revisions" territory and not the boundary between "major revision" and "reject."
Here are my answers:
(1) Erring on the side of being slightly more careful / explicit / wordy has never hurt anyone. I agree that a large majority of the readers of this article will know the theorems of Dirichlet and Minkowski, but if some do not then omitting the statements signals that the paper is not for them whereas including them makes it much easier for them to continue reading. (Of course I agree that anyone can google and find the statements of these theorems and it is easy to do so...but it is even easier to put the paper down and go on to something else if your interest was borderline.) On the other hand, a reader who knows these statements well can just skip them: no problem. So provided that as an author I had made the expository choice to include these theorem statements, I would not be easily talked out of it by a reviewer. As to whether I would actually have done this: I have a paper where I state MCBT. I often say "by Dirichlet's Theorem" (more often: "by Cebotarev density"!) and assume readers know what I mean.
In terms of citation: I don't like the idea of a referee talking an author being talked out of citing work that they use in the paper. It feels like getting pushed in the wrong direction. I have to admit though that I would not myself cite either of these results, and I do have some sense that if you cite things which are too basic then people start to wonder about your background. ("No one cites Einstein..." And Einstein came after Minkowski and way after Dirichlet.)
(2) Not lightly do I advise anyone to do anything which could result in their paper not being accepted. But in this case I am tempted to advise the student to leave in the statements. He should respond to the referee: for instance if his response includes other papers published in the last decade by the same journal which include statements of one or both of these results, his case looks strong. That one should not rewrite papers so as to make them harder to read seems like an important lesson.
I am tempted to tell the student that I would not include these citations and the referee is really correct that they are not needed. If he does want to leave them in, then maybe he should go "whole hog" and include primary source material. I haven't seen many contemporary math papers with works by Dirichlet and Minkowski in their bibliographies...but I wouldn't mind at all if I did see them.
I've known a few mathematicians that, when they opt to cite something, insist on citing the oldest, most primary source material they can find. Even when more modern and accessible versions exists. I recently cited a result of Remak (early 1900's) in a (joint) paper. While the result is almost certainly either very well known to group theorists, or considered easy to prove on first sight, no modern reference for the result could be found. And the intended audience was more algebraists than group theorists. Thankfully the paper was actually freely available online.
I cited Archimedes once, but it was out of playfulness --- I could not resist! I would advise making habit out of it though :-)
I do have some sense that if you cite things which are too basic then people start to wonder about your background. There's definitely a potential issue there. I've seen a paper, written by a student, which stated the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality as a lemma, which struck me as ridiculous. But it's not obvious to me whether Dirichlet and Minkowski are on the same side of the line as C-S (and, of course, where the line is depends on the paper's audience).
Citations serve two purposes:
Acknowledging the original source of ideas
Giving readers easy access to a source to read more about a result that they may not understand.
In the case of standard theorems that are named after their discoverers and which are sufficiently famous to be in Wikipedia, I don't think citing a textbook accomplishes either of these goals. It's much faster and easier to google the theorem than to find the particular text mentioned.
I don't think there's any harm in this kind of citation, so I don't know why the referee cares. But I also don't see a good reason to include them.
If anything, I would cite Wikipedia with a hyperlink. That at least saves your reader some time.
... and some referees will revolt at the notion that Wiki is a legitimate source for anything at all... (which I think is foolish, but nevermind).
Well I'm sure you've already made your advice by now, but for future reference, here is my perspective.
First, my general philosophy is that one should try to make papers reasonably accessible to young people who have not spent months or years working on this specific problem. I generally feel that most math papers should do a better job of providing references than they do.
(1) I would hear the referee's suggestions and with those in mind, I would rethink about whether it is worthwhile to include references, taking into account both how well known those specific results are and the target audience (whether I would specifically refer to those theorems of Dirichlet and Minkowski depends on who I am writing to--for a "regular" research paper, I would probably do the same as you). As a somewhat experienced mathematician, I think I have a reasonable idea of what is worthwhile to provide a reference for and that I can make suitable decisions on my own. However, referee reports constantly remind me that things I think are obvious or well-known are not obvious or well-known to a lot of people. Consequently, what one thinks should be included as a reference varies a lot from person to person.
(2) When I was a student, I viewed comments like this from referees and my advisor as learning experiences about what to include and not to include. I would first of all tell the student (i) you don't have to make all changes the referee suggests but (ii) you should consider them seriously. However, as people may have different perspectives, and the student has limited experience, it would probably be useful for the student to hear other perspectives (e.g., yours and possibly another colleague's). After giving your advice/suggestions, let the student decide what exactly to do (as I'm sure you would).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.449111 | 2016-02-14T19:02:10 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63362",
"authors": [
"Andreas Blass",
"Anthony Gill",
"Ariel Chotta Alcántara",
"Boris Bukh",
"Christian Clason",
"Darshini Konasale S",
"Emmy B",
"Makes Kumari",
"Mark Meckes",
"Michael Jackson Jackson",
"Noah Snyder",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Pete L. Clark",
"SPet",
"Stefan",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13852",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/176522",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/176523",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/176524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/176525",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177525",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177526",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177527",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/177642",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/186472",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/609",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"moud",
"paul garrett",
"user177525",
"zibadawa timmy"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
7586 | What is a good checklist for last minute changes before submitting a PhD thesis?
I have finished my thesis, it's been proofread by my advisor and myself, yet I have 24 hours to make last-minute changes to it. What should I be looking for? I will not make any substantial changes to the content, but what about the form? For such limited amount of time, where should I focus my effort? Or, said another way: what’s in your last-day check list for a thesis?
Major modifications to the original question. Thanks to F'x for the advice.
First, if you've already proofread it recently, a second try will most likely not help. You won't see the typos and weird sentences anyway :) I'll advise to focus on specific short parts that can make a difference in the reading. It's also the right time to get someöne else on board to give these specific items a second look (with fresh eyes).
Without further ado, I suggest you limit yourself to checking the following items:
Text
The main check here is not really for typos (although be sure to fix those you will see), but rather for clarity.
General introduction, general conclusion
Introduction and conclusion of each chapter
Summary/abstract, if one is included (sometimes it's written in 10 minutes in a haze, in which case it's worth extra checking in the end)
Acknowledgments, if it's already present (some people only include it after the defense is over). Make sure you're not forgetting someöne important, like your wife or your bonsai.
Figures and figure captions
Quality of the graphics
Do color and symbols mentionned in the caption match the figure?
If you intend to have black and white figures in print, are the figures understandable in black and white? Do the captions make sense for both version (color and B&W)?
Equations
Check your equations. Again. Typos there are typically hard to find.
Numbers & tables
All tables, all inline numbers: make sure they include units, make sure the number of significant digits displayed is reasonable and consistent.
Bibliography
Do not care to much about the formatting: if most of it is okay, noöne will really complain about one or two missing page numbers or lack of italics in one title. However:
If references are hyperlinked (using DOI number), click on each to check that they match the right online paper
If a paper is “in press” or “accepted for publication” or something else, check if it has been published since and update its status
(The starting point for this was my answer to “Examining paper proofs”, but it is now significantly different)
I found the checklist for captions and units in the tables to already be very useful!
+1 for paying special attention to the figures and figure captions. Incorrect captions are easy to miss and one of the more common mistakes, especially if you've been reordering your figures.
Make sure bibliography entries are sound and complete.
Your goal is to present a viable thesis to your examiners so perhaps there is a need to change your thinking about not making "substantial changes". I know this is a difficult call at this late stage but if you discover a gap in your thesis, it is better to address it before submitting it to your examiners, rather than getting the examiners to point it out to you. If the latter happens, you will have to substantially revise your thesis and this will tax you emotionally to say the least.
As for the checklist, I have the following suggestions:
Check that you have really built up your case for the research. Your examiners will not be convinced if you present a flimsy case. Ensure there is a strong reason why you conducted the research (i.e. define the gap in knowledge that you are addressing).
Check that you have actually answered your research questions. I am unsure in which field you are situated but in sociology the answer is often not that clearcut. However, you can still make a strong case for or against your research proposition.
If you have done statistical analysis, make sure you demonstrate that you have a good understanding of what you did (i.e. you understand the assumptions that underpin the technique, for example Pearson's r is for linear relationships).
Check that you have a section (in the concluding chapter) that spells out in black and white what contribution your thesis is making in your field. Often we just assume that the examiners will understand the contribution. We know our research so well (after doing it for 3 or so years) that the contribution is apparent to us, but it is a different story for the examiners.
Demonstrate critical thinking with a blend of personality. This is a bit controversial but your thesis is a reflection of your interests and a little bit of personality in your thesis will not hurt (only a little bit, though as this is academic writing). In my case, I incorproated my experience as an immigrant to explain why I chose to study what I studied.
Remember, you will not get a poor result because of typos (though many typos will create a poor impression), so focus on the bigger issues if you can. All the best!
I like #4, and maybe #5, but I don't think #1-3 reasonably fit in the “last minute” or “last 24 hours” category… each substantial change made at the last minute carries a risk!
@F'x As I said, it is better to correct any shortcoming yourself, rather than let the examiner point it out and then you have to spend a semester or so addressing the examiner's concern. This is time well spent in the final 24 hours in my view!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.450047 | 2013-01-29T20:17:21 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7586",
"authors": [
"Alex",
"Ankit",
"C_B",
"Conor",
"F'x",
"Javeer Baker",
"Kizuna777",
"Lipeandarai",
"Sunil Kumar",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18116",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18117",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18119",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18122",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18133",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18134",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/18137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44679",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5630",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8436",
"jaye1234",
"m1alesis",
"sidhun kumar",
"user18118",
"user2768"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
8595 | Is there anything to do while waiting for results of a thesis examination?
I handed in my PhD thesis for examination. From reading the examination instructions it appears that if I get my degree, it could be between 6 weeks to a year. It all depends upon the comments I get back from the examiners.
My plan during that time was continue work on my research, get more results and publish more papers. Also, help out other PhD students in their research.
Considering the time-frame is so variable, is there anything else I should be doing or planning? The only advice I was given, was don't take a holiday.
BTW: I am quietly confident that the examination results I will get back will be positive.
Do you have a job waiting for you when you graduate?
@Paul Availability is always a key issue when considering job candidates.
Why don't you write a PhD memoir? Only one person has done it so far.
What have other students at your university done in similar situations?
@Paul I don't plan on a job until I get my degree.
That is not a great idea, as getting a new position can take some time.
@PaulHiemstra Aren't employers hesitant to accept people when there is no date nor virtual 100% certainty? Or perhaps they can't even start the bureaucracy before there is a PhD diploma?
I do not specifically mean actually getting a new job, but investing some time in scouting around for possible institutes to work, what are popular grant providers, spend time growing your network into the direction where you want to go. You could be lucky, and find an advertised job just after finishing your PhD, but it doesn't hurt to prepare.
Don't you have some sort of oral exam/defense/viva to prepare for? Apart from that, I definitely recommend working on getting a job already. I think it's perfectly normal to start applying already before completing your PhD. I actually started my first job before I submitted, but most postdocs probably do require you to have the PhD already by the time you start.
What does your advisor suggest?
From reading the examination instructions it appears that if I get my degree, it could be between 6 weeks to a year.
Have you talked with your advisor about the time frame you should expect? University policies often allow for a wide range of possible schedules, to account for differing circumstances. The advisor generally has a clear idea of which part of the range a student is likely to end up in (although of course there are no guarantees).
When you reach the point of graduating, there should be little uncertainty left about the quality or value of your work, because your advisor should have been offering feedback and guidance along the way. If your advisor is genuinely unable to predict whether it will be closer to 1.5 or 12 months more, then it is a worrisome sign (suggesting inexperience or negligence on the advisor's part, or that they suspect something may be wrong with your dissertation).
Considering the time-frame is so variable, is there anything else I should be doing or planning?
I agree with the comments above about job applications. In the cases I am familiar with (mathematics in the U.S.), academic job applications are due around December, which is typically about six months before graduation occurs. This includes both faculty and postdoc applications. Practices may differ in other fields or countries, but it's almost always a good idea to begin looking substantially before you actually graduate.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.450626 | 2013-03-14T01:27:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8595",
"authors": [
"Chris Gregg",
"JeffE",
"Leo1215",
"Nobody",
"Paul",
"Paul Hiemstra",
"Tara B",
"Tempo River",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20810",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20811",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20812",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21011",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4091",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44515",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4461",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5630",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5955",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/931",
"j-i-l",
"jaye1234",
"math137",
"mosafattah",
"user13107"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
7335 | What licensing concerns are there for using content from Stack Exchange in an academic paper?
All content under Stack Exchange is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. Does this mean that any academic paper that uses content from Stack Exchange must also be licensed under said Creative Commons?
If not, what is the actual rule on this part?
Essentially the question can be rephrased as, "does using content from a Stack Exchange post make the work that uses it count as a derivative work?"
Another possibility is to segregate lengthy quotations in another file. If you only need to quote small amounts, you can probably do that under fair use. If you need lengthy quotations or other data sets, you could have an auxiliary file (with the CC BY-SA license) that presents the data you need, and then you could refer readers to that file in your paper. This would give you a stable, archivable file that highlights what you need, without letting the license affect the rest of your paper.
Related but not quite a duplicate: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10459/is-it-legal-ethical-to-use-data-grabbed-from-a-stack-exchange-site-in-a-paper
Making a reference to CC Attribution-ShareAlike content is always okay. In fact, referring to any work is okay, regardless of the copyright status. Only content is copyrighted, not bibliographic elements (including author names and title). For example, the U.S. Copyright Office says:
Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases.
Quoting is a more complex matter. It depends on copyright laws, and thus your country. In most cases, if the material is quoted raw and the quote is kept short, most academic use should fall under the doctrine of fair use. By contrast, read also the article on derivative work to get an idea of these two extreme cases.
This is mostly a theoretical question, however: the scope of fair use is grey are in US Copyright Law, and provided you do it for academic purposes and in a good faith, you won't get into trouble.
Finally: if you really want to quote in a bulletproof way, either (a) consult with a lawyer or (b) ask the copyright holder for a waiver to relicense his content to you.
By "referencing" I meant using content that would merit a citation, not citing in a bibliography. Sorry for being unclear.
(That definition probably carried over from my work in art, where "referencing" somebody else's work means using it as a reference for doing your own thing.)
@Joe it's not really clear what you mean by referencing. But like F'x says, the key issue is whether you are quoting (i.e. copying) the content from the SE site or not.
For quotations that are covered by "fair use" of the copyrighted work, you don't need to get a license. Even if you already have a license to use the work (such as a CC license), you don't need to stick to the terms of the license for this type of usage.
So, even if your paper may be a derivative work, you don't have to apply the terms of the license, and you wouldn't have to put your work under a CC license. As soon as your quotations go beyond fair use, you would in fact have to put your work under the required license.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.451253 | 2013-01-18T17:34:01 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7335",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Chris Pickard",
"David Z",
"Irwin",
"Joe Z.",
"allanberry",
"anomaly",
"coding_idiot",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17409",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17410",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17411",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17412",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17414",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17415",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/236",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5647",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5944",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"magallanes",
"mbbessa",
"user40480"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
15772 | Ethical nature of multiple post-doctoral applications
I am a student applying in different places for postdoctoral positions and asking various faculties for position. It happened that, due to limited resources, I am not getting much response. However more than one faculty (from different institutes all in Europe) gave positive responses. The caveat is, I have to jointly write a research proposal with them for grant application/some fellowships. Whatever be the outcome of the proposal(s), I am starting my collaboration with them soon.
My dilemma starts here. The fellowships each one suggested are very competitive. Those faculties themselves informed me that getting those fellowships became more difficult in the present financial situation. Now is it ethical to do apply for multiple funding agencies in this way? Fortunately, each of them suggested applying for different fellowships. I am slightly afraid of the morality of the whole issue (like: what if all of the projects get funding). Please help.
There is nothing wrong or strange to apply for several fellowships and funding as you describe. The opposite would mean you have to gamble on one and hope it comes through. What can be a bit problematic is perhaps if each proposal causes a lot of work for somebody in a department if you later is a no show despite funding. In such a case it would be good to let people know you are sending in other applications as well so they are not completely in the dark about your situation. I am sure everyone will be sympathetic. If they are not you may not want to go there anyway.
The risk of getting money from several of your applications seems like a luxury problem. Yes, you have to decide which one to go for but that should be a pleasant problem. I would tackle the problem IF it becomes reality and not worry about it at this stage. Your first step is to get applications in, not worry about what to do when and if any funding comes through.
Let your grant-collaborators know upfront seems like the core of it here. Writing a proposal with Dr. X and then walking out on them without warning might indeed be unethical; but as long as you tell Dr. X upfront that you’re making other applications which you might take in preference to theirs, they can decide for themselves whether they’re happy to accept that (usually slight) risk, and in that case, you have no need to feel guilty if you end up doing what you told them you might.
Peter Jansson is right, don't worry about that perspective, it may not happen. If it will happen, you'll worry about it; but if it won't happen, you're now worrying in vain. “I have lived through some terrible things in my life, some of which actually happened.” (Mark Twain)
It depends a lot what kinds of grants or fellowships you are applying to. In any case, you have to check the guidelines of the fellowships very throughly. It is not uncommon that you have to indicate if you have submitted a similar proposal elsewhere (stating precisely where). It may even stated that "cross submission" is not allowed.
Who says the other proposals are similar?
Nobody. But it may well be that the proposals have some thematic overlap and often one has to indicate this too.
@gerrit That is a good point. Fortunately for me, that problem did not appear as of now.
You are applying for a job. A prestigious, noble and publicly-beneficial job, but that does not change its fundamental character. And as a post-doc you will do research work, and get a salary for it - just like a Professor, on one hand, and a security guard or cleaning crew member, on the other hand.
Do you think any of them should only apply for one position at a time?
Another aspect of this fact: Nobody will be doing you a favor. They make offers, and you can accept or reject them; just like they get applications and may accept or reject them. Your tone seems slightly self-deprecating - and there's no need for that. You're a (soon to be) recognized Doctor of Philosophy. Stand tall!
It is perfectly ethical and reasonable to write multiple applications because chances are low. In most of cases, you will get only one application accepted anyway and it will be no problems. In unlikely case when you get more than one positive response, it should make no problem to pick that suits for you best.
Of course, theoretically if you are good enough for a position A, you should also be good for the positions B, C and D, if the requirements are similar. However this also depends on many random factors. Maybe you know some method they plan to use in research but for some reason did not state clearly in the announcement. Maybe the professor has (grounded or not) personal opinion that your institution or journal where you have published is very bad or very good. People pre-screening the applications may apply different priorities. Depends a lot on who else has applied for the position. Many things can happen.
Waiting for the solution that often takes weeks at least and significantly reduces the number of applications that are possible to write, creating risks that you will never succeed with any.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.451567 | 2014-01-14T17:28:04 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15772",
"authors": [
"Amanda Mcknight",
"Andy Bisbee",
"DavideChicco.it",
"Dheepan Manoharan",
"Dirk",
"Hunsu",
"Ike",
"PLL",
"RSG",
"Wooly Jumper",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1277",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/161151",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/161198",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/379",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41227",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41229",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41230",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41242",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41248",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4462",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/529",
"mrq"
],
"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
} |
7754 | What is a "publishable" thesis?
What is a "publishable" thesis?
I have often heard this term thrown about in conferences and even as advice to new grad. students.
From what I know, it is indeed rare for a thesis to be published entirely as a book, though one can publish papers out of the thesis.
In some cases it might mean that the thesis could be published as a book. However, I'd generally interpret the phrase to mean that the thesis could readily be adapted and published as one or more journal articles.
and the conclusions don't make the sponsors of that journal angry... So much of science has become politicised to the point where studies that counter the agendas of major pressure groups may be impossible to publish because there's simply no publication that dares take them on for fear of losing lucrative business deals with other parties that have more money to spend than you.
I assume that, once again, this probably depends on your field and country.
In the Netherlands, apparently, it is required to leave a large quantity (>100) with your university. Also, an ISBN will be assigned, according to my contract. This should mean that anyone could quite easily order a copy. I don't want to know the costs of such an order though.
Sometimes you can also find them on Google Scholar. Although I'm not sure how i will have to proceed to have mine appear there (in years), I like to read them. They usually are well written and give a very good overview of the field in a concise manner. Reading papers to achieve that kind of overview usually takes a lot longer.
This would be my answer to the title question. A well written overview of the work, done during your PhD, in relation to what is known in the field.
In some places, all theses have unique ISBN. In some places, the university issues theses as a series with ISSN. In some places, the university do not care.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.451988 | 2013-02-04T01:11:51 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7754",
"authors": [
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11647",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44566",
"jwenting",
"wovenworld",
"yo'"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
7914 | Issues with publishing dissertation on an interest/advocacy group's website
I am wondering if it would hurt me (professional creditability etc.) if I publish my dissertation on an interest / advocacy group's website.
My dissertation is in one of the areas that this group has been advocating for a long time. Obviously, there are many other contrary views to the views of this interest group. The interest group is known nationally and, in essence, functions as a political lobby.
I am employed in the same industry, so chose to study in this area from a well respected university. It was easy to identify this gap in knowledge and to address it with robust research.
There has been no issues to date but now that the dissertation is approved, I am thinking of making it more widely available, hence the above option.
Note that if you publish papers in open-access journals that have Creative Commons-style copyright, there's nothing that can stop them from copying your paper. And even if you don't, they can still — either with papers or with journals — write articles naming you and linking your research. I've had a (journalistic style) photograph I've taken end up on a nationalist website, with the website crediting me (as they are obliged to); I'm not 100% happy with that...
I would be cautious. That said, I think there are easy alternatives that don't involve giving up exposure of your work through their advocacy.
If you value credibility as an independent researcher, you will be well served by not being perceived as shilling for any particular organization or political cause. I think the interests of the organization that is requesting permission to republish your dissertation is in line with this. If your research is findings that are politically expedient for them, they benefit from the enhanced credibility that you garner from perceived intellectual independence.
My advice would be something like this:
Publish your dissertation on your own website or in your institutional archive. (If you don't have a website, now would be a great time to set one up!) It should only take a day or so to get set up.
Once you've done that, suggest that the organization write a summary of your work on their website — clearly in their voice — and to link to or repost (if they feel that is absolutely necessary) your work.
You will benefit from the traffic to your website and they will benefit by having your work seem like the work of an independent researcher and not something done by someone inside. And indeed, it sounds like this is exactly the case!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.452168 | 2013-02-10T23:45:06 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7914",
"authors": [
"Syi",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44565"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
6130 | Co-authorship for not very involved supervisor
I have now completed my PhD by research.
I received support from my supervisor in the form of advice on my chapters (for which I am indebted to him; we have a very good working relationship).
The advice mostly related to clarity of arguments. My supervisor was not actively involved in my research and he did not amend or add to any chapters. He just provided broad advice on the contents of each chapter so that I can fulfil the requirements of my degree.
In this case, should I credit him as a joint author in any paper I may publish from my dissertation? I cannot see a case for joint copyright of my work!
What did you agree on before you started working together? (You did discuss co-authorship standards before you started working together, didn't you?)
I guess it would depend on the field of study. As I understand it, in engineering, the adviser of a dissertation is automatically included as the last author in papers involving the dissertation.
@JeffE This matter was never raised (I wasn't even aware of it until I completed my dissertation and got some free time to think about the next step from here.) We did not work together in the co-author sense; it was a student-supervisor relationship.
@JoelReyesNoche: ...except in (some parts of) computer science.
@JeffE Sounds quite unusual to me. Did you discuss authorship when you started your Phd?
@FedericoPoloni: Yes, absolutely! (In theoretical computer science, mere advising or funding is not considered an intellectual contribution meriting co-authorship. For example, I am not a coauthor on all my students' papers; if anything, I'm less likely to be a coauthor on papers involving their dissertations. Also, "last author" only means "author whose name is last in alphabetical order".)
This question should be relevant: Supervisors and authorship if not a duplicate.
I'll assume that you have a good relationship to your PhD advisor and that you can have a reasonable discussion with him. If this is not the case, then ignore the following as you will potentially have much bigger things to worry about.
It sounds as if the papers have not been written yet, so I'd suggest you discuss this with him as soon as possible. Lay out to him which papers you want to write, what will be in them, and where you plan to submit them, and ask him if he would like to be a co-author on any of them.
Now, the important thing is that this co-authorship you're offering is not a free ride. I would assume that a good supervisor knows that this will imply a significant contribution to the preparation of the manuscript and/or any follow-up work that still needs to be done. If he is willing to actively contribute to the papers, then you have a bona fide co-author and nothing to worry about.
If your supervisor is not willing to contribute anything to your publications, then there is no reason to add him as a co-author.
In any case, you should be open and honest about your intentions. Your supervisor is a very important person in the critical post-PhD phase of your academic career, and even if you leave academia, he is your previous employer. In any case, he will be writing all your letters of recommendation, so don't do anything that may have a negative influence on your relationship.
In summary: Ask him first, and if necessary, remind him that co-authorship implies active collaboration. If he does actively collaborate, you have a good and valuable co-author, and if he does not, he will either not want co-authorship, or you will have a valid reason not to add him.
I strongly agree, with this answer. Just ask.
Yep. I've had supervisors kindly rejecting authorship in cases where they didn't see it appropriate.
I think this kinds of discussions boil down to if a person has had a significant impact on the paper. This can be in either of the following categories:
conception and design of the project
data collection
data analysis and conclusions
manuscript preparation
These are the categories in the quantitative uniform authorship declaration (QUAD) system (Verhagen JV, Wallace KJ, Collins SC, Scott TR (2003) QUAD system offers fair shares to all authors. Nature 426: 602., or this link for some information). THe QUAD system quantifies what each author has contributed to. Ofcourse, where you put the line when someone is a co-author or not is debatable.
If your supervisor does not tick a lot of boxes, you could put him in the acknowledgements of your papers. Alternatively, if you feel his contribution is significant in either of the above categories, or more than one, add him as an author.
In addition, co-authorships come reasonably cheap. You have collaborated on your project, and you make your supervisor happy with an additional publication. Also, your supervisor is probably more well known in your field of study. If he associates himself with this paper that might mean more attention for your paper, although how valid this point is depends on the reputation of your supervisor.
In regard to copyright, often you sign the copyright of your paper over to the publisher of the paper. Maybe you do not mean copyright, but attribution. You did the work, and adding him as a co-author makes it look like you did not do it alone. If you feel like this, it looks like you feel his contribution has not been significant enough to make him co-author.
A lot of things to consider.
+1 for pointing out that having your supervisor as co-author increases visibility of the result. Still, he shouldn't get it for free, that's certain, but it can influence your decision.
From your description it sounds like your supervisor was acting as a supervisor, not as a collaborator; however without knowing the exact details of his contributions, and what the etiquette/standards of your field are, it would be impossible for us to assess whether or not he should be a co-author. Why not just ask him?
Also, keep in mind that in certain fields it may look bad if your post-PhD publications are all joint with your supervisor - people sometimes assume that means the supervisor did all the work, or question your ability to perform independent research. For this reason, even if his contributions to your work were substantial, your supervisor may prefer to forgo being a co-authour to help your career. Best is to just ask.
+1 Or, if there are several papers, let the supervisor be co-author on some of them. Ideally, I think this co-author issue should be solved by looking at the contributions someone had. Although, both you and me showed some additional things that could be added to the mix of considerations
I know this is quite old, but I am providing an answer as I have experienced something similar recently. Given your description, it looks like you have done the majority (>90%) of the work and, as such, I see no reason why you should even bother with asking your supervisor if they like to be a co-author.
I strongly disagree with Pedro's suggestion, as if you do ask them, they're unlikely to say no (who DOESN'T want to be a co-author on a paper?). And if they say yes, then you have no guarantee that they will do the amount of work necessary for said authorship. In fact, and from my experience, listing someone as a co-author in the hope that they will, along the way, contribute in a way that makes them deserving of that authorship is counterproductive and poor project management. As you said, you've already done the majority of the work - what makes you think that someone who wasn't actively involved in the research will do a good job writing the paper?
PhD students vary. Some of us are self-motivated and know what we're doing and thus require next to no-input from supervisors. Others are not so fortunate and require significant input from supervisors. I see no reason why supervisors should be included as co-authors in the case of the former. Hope it's all sorted now.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.452397 | 2013-01-10T23:41:41 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/6130",
"authors": [
"A.Schulz",
"Artem Kaznatcheev",
"BHamza",
"Federico Poloni",
"Geoff Nixon",
"JRN",
"Javeer Baker",
"JeffE",
"Paul Hiemstra",
"RNG",
"derpoverflow",
"furins",
"genius",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1467",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15936",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15962",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15964",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15965",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15966",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15970",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15977",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4091",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"mmierins",
"user130110",
"user15966",
"yo'"
],
"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
} |
23691 | List of reputable open access journals
I found a list of "potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers" here.
I am just wondering if there is a similar list of reputable open-access journals in the social sciences.
I would suggest going about this a slightly different way. The reputation of journals derives from views of scholars in a particular discipline. There are many closed access journals that are not very reputable and many open access journals that are reputable. You can figure out the ones that are reputable by looking at three things:
What journals are being cited in other journals of known reputation? Journals that get citations in other journals are likely to be publishing decent research. This is not a guarantee, of course.
Who is publishing in the journal? Reputable scholars tend to publish in reputable outlets. If a journal has prominent scholars publishing good work there, it's probably a decent journal. This is not a guarantee, of course.
Who sponsors and publishes the journal? Reputable journals (especially in the social sciences) tend to be published by or endorsed by scholarly associations. This is not a guarantee, of course.
Thus, rather than trying to find a list of reputable journals, think about how you would evaluate any particular journal. If you find correct answers to any of the above questions, there is a good sign it is a reputable journal since the idea of "reputation" is a social construction that reflect precisely the above criteria.
The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is an attempt to create such a list for all fields, including the social sciences:
DOAJ is an online directory that indexes and provides access to quality open access, peer-reviewed journals.
They have a search function that lets you drill down to specific fields.
DOAJ is a useful reference, but it's worth noting that it's not 100% reliable: building a long list of good journals is much harder than building a list of bad journals. For example, in mathematics DOAJ includes the "Research Journal of Pure Algebra" (http://doaj.org/toc/5423b3e616b74dac9205ff787f86d0aa). I can't say for sure whether this is a reputable journal, since I can find almost no information about it on the web, but their entire web site seems to have died with a message of "This account has been suspended". This is a bad sign, and all the published papers seem to be inaccessible.
OnlineSchools.org produces a list of various open access journals. While I can't say all are reputable, most look like they point to well established and credible organizations or educational institutions.
I am not aware of a list of "reputable" open access journals in the social sciences. But, as a safe starting point, the most reputable open access journals in the social sciences have an ISI impact factor.
Do you mean reputable or infamous? The vast majority of Elsevier journals have ISI impact factors.
@StrongBad what's infamous about Elsevier journals?
@Jigg how about http://thecostofknowledge.com/
The real problem (and probably the reason for this predatory journal explosion) is that the classic journals have become abusive and predatory themselves. For example Springer/Nature journals will reject your paper without explanation and direct you to one of their fee-paying open access for guaranteed acceptance on resubmission.
Worse, the old classic journals do not do peer review often, make decisions based on profitability of your paper and sometimes take months or even over a year to respond. Some do not ever respond. This includes Springer/Nature which did not respond at all to a submission and did not respond to the inquiry about why they did not respond. So, may be these predatory journals are just as predatory as the old corrupted ones. We may have to switch to the new era.
Welcome to academia.SE. This is a question and answer site and answers are supposed to answer the question. Could you edit your answer to include a list of reputable open access journals, or instructions on how to identify such?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.453093 | 2014-06-20T00:54:31 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23691",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Bálint Kőszegi",
"Cape Code",
"Chaitanya Bapat",
"JamEngulfer",
"Matt Kancy",
"Nik",
"StrongBad",
"Suin Kim",
"Tommi",
"Xiaokui Shu",
"akberbirbal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63330",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63331",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63332",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63338",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63340",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63371",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63401",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63405",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78113",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"robinki"
],
"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
} |
7944 | Are books peer-reviewed?
I am unsure for books but I know for certain that selected journal articles are peer-reviewed. (This just shows I am not in academia!)
Do books go through a peer-review process? If so, how does this happen?
If one is approached by a small publisher, does it matter if this publisher does not have a peer-review service (if there is one for books).
Some are. Some aren't. What kind of book are you talking about?
related answer: http://academia.stackexchange.com/a/9298/386
"Books published by university presses almost always go through a process of peer review." Source: https://ncu.libanswers.com/faq/168497
Typically, after an author presents a book proposal to a publisher, the publisher will circulate the proposal to some selected reviewers to vet the content. This is not like peer review in the usual sense: the reviewers only get to see the outline and maybe a chapter or two.
Once the publisher decides to go ahead with the book and it goes through the editing process, it might undergo further review, but nothing like a journal review.
Journals (generally) have too many papers, and need to cut down. Book publishers (in my experience) have too many people who never finish books.
@Jeremy If you are implying that peer review is about the quantity of publications: it's not only about quantity, but also about quality.
@root - not sure I understand. Peer review of books or journals? The process is pretty different.
I guess this is field-dependent because my experience (in math) is different from what is presented in the other answers. At the very least, some book series by some publishers have a peer-review process similar to that of journals for books that are about new research (not textbooks or similar material). The editors would give the whole book to several referees and ask each of them a report about the mathematical correctness, the context, the presentation, etc. There can even be a similar editorial process as the one for articles, with a back-and-forth of corrections and new reports. Sometimes referees would only each be asked about some part of the book, but each part would be covered by at least one referee. I would guess that this does not concern textbooks or "survey" type books, but my experience there is limited.
The major textbook publishers pay for "subject matter expert" reviews of completed books prior to publication, and even of new editions of previously-reviewed books. Some reviewers apparently just submit the publisher's questionnaire. Others, like myself, submit extensive comments. I've proposed corrections that were accepted for books by well-known authors.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.453429 | 2013-02-12T02:52:54 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7944",
"authors": [
"JeffE",
"Jeremy Miles",
"Memming",
"hfingler",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32210",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/386",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6495",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67242",
"root"
],
"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
} |
1148 | Updating a preprint when it is under review
I know that preprints deposited into a preprint server should be in a polished state. However, what should happen once it starts the review process? Should those copy-edits be updated on the preprint? What about updates when replying to reviewer's comments? What if the manuscript is rejected and I am rewriting the manuscript to be resubmitted to another journal in another format?
In principle, anything that happens to the content of a paper before printing (ie, formal publication) should be reflected in the pre-print. So yes, if you correct a bug while the paper is in review, or revise the paper for a new submission, then you should update the preprint.
However, some journals object to authors' posting post-copy-edited (or even post-refereed) revisions. And posting a revision while a paper is under review could interfere with the reviewing process. When in doubt, ask your editor.
Frequent updates may earn you a reputation for being sloppy, especially on a system like the ArXiv that publishes the preprint's revision history. (Why didn't you fix those bugs before you uploaded the first time?) But that's still better than leaving a buggy preprint out in the wild, thereby earning you a reputation for not even knowing (or caring) that you're sloppy. The right answer, of course, is to debug your papers before you post them!
I agree. We should do it right the first time. However, if the author keeps improving his paper(not necessarily fixing bugs), should he revise the paper everytime or wait until he believes he finds the best way to present the paper?
I've clarified the question a bit more in response to your section on sloppiness. I think @Scaaahu makes an excellent point since after all, a paper isn't truly polished and best presented until it finally reaches print.
I tweaked my answer. Changes to the paper's content should be reflected in the preprint. For stylistic issues, I think it's better to wait until you've found the best way to present the paper. (But to repeat myself: Shouldn't you do that before you upload the first time?)
In general, there are more than one way to prove a theorem in a math paper. If I find a better proof, what should I do? It boils down to another question, how many revisions would be considered too many by researchers? This probably should be a separate question. I just want to avoid duplicates. Thanks to the OP for asking the question and to JeffE for answering it.
If you "find a better proof" more than once or twice, you probably should have thought harder instead of posting the first one.
It should be noted that if the journal chose "reject with permission to resubmit" rather than "major revisions" they have no legal right to block you from updating the pre-print. They rejected the old manuscript, it doesn't exist as far as they are concerned, and you can use the peer-reviewer feedback and post the edits. If they chose revise, then you need to follow whatever rules you agreed to with the journal.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.453654 | 2012-04-17T07:00:58 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1148",
"authors": [
"Daria",
"Gabriel Cozzella",
"JeffE",
"Nobody",
"Roddy",
"WetlabStudent",
"bobthejoe",
"detly",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2702",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2703",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2705",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2706",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2708",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2724",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28663",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"nadya",
"raam86",
"user28663"
],
"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
} |
208592 | How should I properly mention URL links in a thesis?
For example, I have an appendix X, in which I wrote:
Looking on different websites, a list of models of X was compiled for Y purpose. These websites are:
\begin{description}[noitemsep]
\item \url{https:.....}
\item \url{https:.....}
\item \url{https:.....}
\item \url{https:.....}
\end{description}
To clarify, models of X often have a short lifespan.
To determine if they are obsolete or not, the following websites were used: \url{https:.....} and \url{https:....}.
Is it okay to put the links like that, or should I make a reference in the bibliography for each link? How is the right format? For instance:
Looking on different websites, a list of models of X was compiled for Y purpose. These websites are [1], [2], [3], and [4].
To clarify, models of X often have a short lifespan.
To determine if they are obsolete or not, the following websites were used: [x] and [y].
In the bibliography:
[1] Website 1 URL
[2] Website 2 URL
[3] Website 3 URL
[4] Website 4 URL
[x] Website X URL
[y] Website Y URL
I've been considering the idea of naming the title of the website and adding a citation to it, something along these lines:
Appendix:
"...the following websites were utilized: "Title or Name of the Website" [x]. and "Title or Name of the second Website" [y].
Bibliography:
[x] [Title] Available at: www.example.com
I am thinking about removing the list of websites and leave only two links.
How long are these URLs? Are they super ugly?
what style guide does your school use?
@AzorAhai-him- the longest one is: https://gr-satellites.readthedocs.io/en/latest/supported_satellites.html
@RichardErickson They only said: "According to the examination regulations, there are no specifications regarding the formatting/design of the thesis. In case of doubt, please refer to DIN 5008"
@O.R.Mapper I think so
In lieu of any formatting prescriptions, remember that citations serve two purposes: to provide proper intellectual credit and for the use and convenience of your reader.
A format that makes your thesis hard to read is bad.
In my opinion, a list of websites used for data are distinct from other intellectual citations, so I think they would be most useful compiled and listed separately from your other references/bibliography. If they are in an appendix and you clearly refer to the appendix when it's appropriate to do so, that seems like it would be easily digestible to a reader. They only need to seek your appendix if the list of websites is important to them, and if the list of websites is important to them then they are organized in one clear place. You should also make clear to your reader how these particular websites were chosen, as well as all the information necessary to contextualize your use of those websites, like the date accessed.
While it is a bit hard to understand what you want, I think the essential thing is that each URL should be listed with the date at which you accessed it last ("...often have a short lifespan...").
This should always be done with any volatile resource or one associated with a given date/time.
Alternatively use a link archived at the Wayback Machine.
Yes, if they are transient sources, or might be, part of the biblio entry should be "downloaded on ", or similar.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.454019 | 2024-03-18T16:57:10 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/208592",
"authors": [
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"Richard Erickson",
"ed190",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/182351",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33210",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87521 | Should a marker TA handle students' marking issues by email?
I am a university marker TA. The instructor requires TAs to meet students if they have marking issues. But I found most students just come to meet me for better grades, not to ask questions, and some are tough to handle; they just insist they should get better grades.
I feel that is annoying. Is it a better idea to handle the cases by email, and let them talk to the instructor if they have further questions?
Tell the professor in charge of the course that some students just come to meet you for more marks, not to ask questions, and some are tough to handle, insisting they should get more marks. Hopefully the professor will tell you that if a student will not let it go, after 10 minutes of you attempting to explain the correct solution, and explain how yours falls short, then you should direct the student to the professor. That is the ideal way to address this, and hopefully the professor will think so too.
See also what to do about grade grubbing
@Ben Crowell I grade exam papers.
While the situation is indeed annoying, think of it as a training opportunity: by dealing with these insistent students you are getting really good practice in standing up for yourself in a professional environment (moreover, in a low stakes situation where nothing much other than your ego is at stake, and where you are the person in authority, which makes things a lot easier). The skills you will develop through this practice will be really valuable for you later on in life when the stakes can be much higher -- say, when you are asking for a promotion or a raise, or arguing an important technical point with a colleague or superior. So, the next time you hold office hours think of it as "I am going to my `assertiveness class'" instead of "I am going to be attacked by hostile students". This subtle change in perspective could end up making the experience a lot more tolerable, even fun.
It may be a way to practice, but I found many TAs only do one term of TA job in their graduate study. So this practice might not pay back.
@Tony what do you mean by "pay back"? What form of payback are you expecting?
@Tony I think what Dan was implying was that this a chance to practice for future situations in the professional or academic environments. The merits of such experience are much more than just "helping you be a better TA in future semesters"
@Tony the payback is the rest of your life, not just your academic career. Maybe you have never met a car salesperson face to face yet!
@alephzero What if the students' attitude is awful and arrogant? I feel uncomfortable dealing with such students. Can I just tell them to get out?
I strongly recommend publishing and adopting the following policies:
Publish detailed grading rubrics describing how you assign partial credit. Follow them slavishly when handling regrade requests.
Regrade requests must be submitted in writing at most X days after the graded work has been returned. Each request must include a brief written explanation of why the grade is incorrect. (Note: not "...why they deserve more points.")
While you are happy to discuss answers and even grades in person, you will not change any grades in the students' presence. Or maybe even within 24 hours of meeting with the student requesting the regrade. Maybe add an exemption for arithmetic / recording errors.
Your responses to regrade requests are final. Further appeals will be automatically forwarded to the instructor. (If the instructor bounces them back to you, that means they're happy with your earlier decision.)
Finally, ask the instructor to announce these policies on the course web page. Better yet, ask the instructor to forbid you to change grades in the students' presence, or to regrade the same submission more than once.
As for demands from students for higher grades: Look them straight in the eye and tell them that giving them anything less than the fair and honest evaluation that they (or their parents) have paid for would be grossly unfair, not only to other students or future employers, but to the students themselves. Refer all complaints about your grading rubric to the instructor. Unless they want to discuss the substance of their work, gently but firmly kick them out of your office.
I always went with "sorry, but I cannot give you marks you did not earn".
If they gave me a hard time (and I had a few... "well if you would just TRY to find somewhere to give me extra marks! I can't believe you won't try to help me pass!")
I just say sorry, but it isn't my responsibility to do the work. It's yours, and I can only give you marks where you've earned them.
These headaches are a reason us educators have a job.
Depending on the person and the work I like to look at their exams again and explain why they lost marks and where they could do better, in the rare case that this doesn't do them justice I make it clear that on this exam, today, right now they do not deserve the marks they're asking for. I'll typically throw a few tips at them and tell them to prepare better so they can make up the marks next time.
I like to be open-minded when it comes to a kid's marks because I know a lot of incredibly bright students who make silly and sad mistakes I know they could've avoided. Totally shutting them out and saying things like "marks are not up for negotiation" can really destroy the self-esteem of these students and make them lose hope throughout your course.
+1 This is very useful advice. Providing a constructive perspective is really the best way to go.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.454333 | 2017-04-02T23:52:35 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/87521",
"authors": [
"Abbas Javan Jafari",
"Arturo don Juan",
"Dan Romik",
"Rapidturtle",
"alephzero",
"aparente001",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17459",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24979",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78836"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
183088 | How can I have productive meeting with a very prominent researcher?
Summary: I am a shy/introverted PhD student and I have a collaborator at another university. They are setting up a meeting for me with an important researcher in the field. What should I even say in a meeting like that? How can I make it productive?
I am a PhD student and I have a collaborator from another university which invited me to visit. I came here and this collaborator suggested me to meet with one quite important researcher there in the field we work, with whom he works as well. By the way we had a very brief interaction once and he is very nice.
Now, I would certainly like very much to meet such an important researcher, but the thing is that I have no idea what to say in a meeting like that. I'm pretty much a beginner, and right now I don't have any bright ideas to put forward nor any useful comment.
In that case I feel pretty much confused about what to do. I feel like not going to such a meeting might be losing one opportunity and, moreover, might feel very discourteous. On the other hand I'm afraid of going, having not much to say and just being in an awkward situation.
Given that I'm a visiting researcher in another university and I'm invited to meet some other important researcher in the field, what should I even say in a meeting like that? How can I deal with this in the most appropriate way to not lose this quite nice opportunity and also not being in an awkward situation?
One small detail about myself: I'm very shy and introvert, so I'm not much the talkative type really.
Browse thru' the questions in this forum, select a few, and use them to initiate conversations.
@VitaminE Better yet, pick at random and greet them with gems like "Can you do research during a strike?" or "Sometimes, I want to punch people in the face, what do I do about it?" ;) Are there any legitimately good conversation starters on academia.SE though?
++++1. I'm a postdoc and still feel this way. My number 1 tip is don't be afraid to ask questions about the topic they're telling you about, even if you think the questions are really stupid/low level/naive. This way you can keep the conversation going, and try to learn something. They're not expecting you to come up with the next groundbreaking idea in the field, so don't place this expectation on yourself either :)
Your collaborator proposed this meeting; what did he say the purpose of the meeting would be? Advice for you will be quite different depending on whether the purpose of the meeting is for the researcher to learn about your work, or for you to learn about their work, or for the three of you to talk about working together—or perhaps it's just a social meeting so that you'll know each other in the future.
Rather than put forward your own ideas, which might still be a bit naive (as you suggest), ask for advice. Let the superstar take the lead. If you've read any of their papers, you can mention that.
But, for a beginner, it is enough to express some interest in your own areas, even if that is different from that of the other.
You can always ask questions about what interesting research threads you might want to look at over the next year or so.
But, don't present yourself as something that you are not.
And if the meetings are informal, the discussions might well turn to non-academic topics: in the US, the drama of the impending baseball season, for example.
Hi @Buffy, thanks for the advice ! Yes, I have read his last paper (which turned out be in one particular subject in the field I'm very interested in), though I have not yet fully understood it because it employs a formalism which it's new to me.
@Aegon Then the things you haven't understood yet will form natural questions!
DO:
Try to keep up with the ideas and look for openings where you could potentially contribute something interesting.
Take this intimidation caused by a perceived power and skill imbalance out of the equation and focus on the content of the research instead.
Realize we all start somewhere and this one encounter would not make or break your career. People tend to overestimate the importance of such singular events and then the impostor syndrome kicks in.
Believe in yourself. Others (your collaborator) do. They think extending the collaboration might be fruitful - so, in a sense, you are "deemed worthy". Instead of questioning it, try to accept it and move on to, well, the actual research.
DON'T:
Pretend you understand something you do not. It gets you nowhere and more often than not is blatantly obvious anyway.
Over-prepare for the meeting. This can be outright creepy; some may find joy in this flattery but it is way more often than not bound to be a faux pas.
Retreat into the "coziness" of being timid and borderline subservient. Prefacing nigh every sentence with the likes of "Of course, I could not possibly understand this on the level you do, but maybe..." is disastrous and totally unacceptable for a topic you are actually working on. This is only potentially useful to establish some knowledge boundaries in interdisciplinary research and even then is more annoying than anything.
Hang onto this conversation long after it is over. See above: you might describe this event as life- or career-changing in some 30 years or you might forget about it entirely in a couple of weeks. You might even end up not having much in common at the end of the day, and clinging to this possibility for the sake of possibility is highly unproductive.
Preparing:
If you are anxious about a meeting like this, make sure you are prepared. Some things you can do in preparation
Be prepared to explain what you are working for your PhD. What is the overall goal? What have you found so far? For an initial explanation try to stick to the big picture. Initially try to be concise (i.e have an elevator pitch ready). Also be prepared to adjust the level of technical detail of your explanation. Just because the person your are talking to is a big shot in your field, doesn't mean that they are up to speed on the nitty gritty technical details of the work you are doing. Therefore start at a relatively low technical level, and adjust the level based on the question they ask and the amount of interest they show.
If you have produced nice figures that illustrate some of your results or particular aspects of the approach you are taking, it is a good idea to have them somewhere you can easily access them (possibly on your phone, or on a tablet/laptop if you happen to be bringing one to the meeting).
Read up on what the person is working on. Look through their recent publications.
Be aware of the major achievements of the person (e.g. look at their most highly cited papers).
During the meeting:
It is OK to let the person you are meeting and your collaborator lead where the discussion goes.
Don't feel pressured to ask a highly technical question about their work.
To keep the conversation going, some fairly standard "small talkish" questions to ask, include asking them about what they are currently working on. In general, this is the favorite topic of most scientists. (Although, in some fields people may be more tight lipped about ongoing research.)
Remember that despite their reputation the person you are talking to is also a human being.
("your are talking to" → "you are talking to" (flag this for deletion after use))
You should tell from your current research, so that the other person get an impression on what you work and how far in the process you are. He might think of you in the upcoming months and you can profit from this. It could be a recently published paper by a third party, he might mention you in a meeting with somebody else, you might be able to write him a question later on.
Often they have questions, as they know the field and they want to clarify what route you are heading for.
Beside that, just let it flow. He might be telling something, your contact might drive the discussion, or you are ending up just getting known each other without too much talk about his or your research. He might be a star in your field, but never forget he is also human. He might be shy, too.
I want to add something that I think is implicit in the other answers (which are good):
I would not expect a particularly "productive" first meeting. I would definitely not put pressure on yourself to make the meeting "productive" in any concrete sense.
It sounds like the researcher is happy to meet you and get to know a bit about you. That's probably all they are expecting, and it will be easy to meet those expectations -- just be yourself. On the other hand, if you set ambitious goals like starting up a research collaboration or saying something impressively smart, that's more likely to backfire and create unnecessary pressure on yourself.
Sure, it's a good idea to be prepared for some possible topics of conversation. You should know how you're going to describe your history and what you're currently working on. You can be prepared with some questions, even simple ones like "what are you currently interested in?" But I wouldn't expect any concrete result other than you two getting to know each other a little, which is "productive" or useful to both of you in a long term sense.
The other possibility, I guess, is that the researcher has a particular idea or project to pitch to you, but if so, you'll find out -- no particular prep is likely to help.
Imagine their situation. Would you like to get praised the whole time? Perhaps not. Treat them as a human being and not as an important researcher. Have a conversation on eye level. Ask how they are doing, how their travel went etc. If you're unfamiliar with small talk, copy what your colleagues say in such situation.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.454901 | 2022-03-08T22:00:37 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/183088",
"authors": [
"Aegon",
"Greg Martin",
"Lodinn",
"Peter Mortensen",
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"astronat supports the strike",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/145124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/473",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47727",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49043",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83430"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
119614 | Can I say no when my principal investigator asks me to help cover lectures next semester?
I'm a postdoc at a US university, and my principal investigator (PI) asked me to cover some of his lectures next semester. I do not want to do any lecturing as I want to focus solely on my research. I am involved in two funded projects, and I therefore have a lot to do research wise.
Can I say no to covering lectures or would that be considered a mark against me?
Are you planning for a career as academic, involving teaching?
Next up: "Can I say no when my ungrateful post-doc asks for a letter of recommendation?" - working with (and for) other people requires a balancing of obligations. A focus solely on your own research interests to the exclusion of all other considerations is not a good strategy going forward, regardless of your desired career path.
If you plan to stay in academia, the teaching experience will look very good on your CV.
The title asks a different question than the post: The title sounds like "can I decline to cover a particular lecture on a particular day", while the post is "can I decline to cover lectures always, for no reason". My suspicion is that these two questions have opposite answers. Can someone edit the title to make it less confusing?
Is your PI asking because they have to miss some lectures, or because they specifically want you to give some lectures?
What the heck does "PI" stand for?
@Notso "Principal Investigator". In other words, advisor, supervisor, boss, or whatever one calls them :)
Apropos of @Jon's comment, I actually heard the line "this candidate would rather quit a job than teach" from a reference once. Mind you, the person I was talking to is habitually blunt to the point of rudeness, but it was still a surprise.
I may be in a similar position to you soon, and also have time worries (and nerves). In my case because the course is established and there are notes and slides already written it would be a good soft-start to lecturing, thus it seems like an opportunity more than a burden. Do you know if you'd have that same advantage, or if you'd end up writing a section of the course, an exam question or two...?
@JonCuster: "Ungrateful"? The PI is not doing him a favor, he's asking him for a favor.
@einpoklum PI's provide extra training, advice, support for postdocs. PI's often share their methodology, their knowledge, their network with postdocs and in many other ways go far beyond their contract obligations.
@DmitrySavostyanov: Your team leader or other kind of professional mentor in a commercial company also advice and support, and sometimes training, as well as share their (and their company's) knowledge, network of contacts, methodology etc. That's part of the process. The post-doc, or the new employee, reciprocates by doing his/her job well, and extending the same courtesies to others when s/he is the more experienced on. That doesn't mean that you would be ungrateful if you didn't, say, fill in for him in some stockholder's meeting.
@einpoklum In you are really comparing academia to a commercial company, sure thing, academia is going to lose in almost every possible regard. Lower salaries, higher workloads, non-existing work-life balance, writing guilt and impostor's syndrome as a year bonus. It's a bad environment, but not exclusively to postdocs.
@DmitrySavostyanov: All fair points. And I agree it's bad not only for post-docs. But I think there's enough of a parallel to explain how I don't believe the post-doc would be ungrateful.
@penelope is this an Americanism? I've not heard the phrase once and I am currently in my 2nd year of postgraduate studies... Edit: I see that it has already been added
@Notso I don't know about the US, it's used in the UK. Technically, here it has nothing to do with a PhD student - advisor relationship and pertains to the person who is responsible for the grant (the PI on a funded project).
I think it'd be really helpful if you'd clarify just how much teaching you're being asked to do. If it's three lectures, I'd say "just do it". If it's fifteen, I'd say "you're being abused". Without this information, I think every answer is making their own assumptions, and this accounts for the wide disparity in advice you're getting.
I don't think a flat "no" would go over very well. Covering classes is something that colleagues are expected to do for one another, within reason. Yes, everyone has their own projects that this takes time away from. But it's really the only way that faculty are able to travel during the school term, which most find essential to keeping an active research program. Saying "I don't want to do any lecturing" will come across as unreasonable and possibly selfish. Keep in mind that "focusing solely on research" is a luxury that basically nobody ever has.
However, you can certainly negotiate, and maybe reduce the amount, while still showing that you're willing to help. Keep in mind that the PI presumably has an interest in your research success, so if the teaching would impact this in specific negative ways, beyond a generic "this is an hour of my time that I could be spending on research", you can point this out and suggest a compromise.
"I'm happy to help out, but seven classes over the semester is kind of a lot. I am going to need to [achieve specific research goals] next semester and I think this might start to get in the way. Maybe you can find another person who can cover some of them, and we'll split them up?"
"I can do January 18, but on March 7 there is a conference that I was really hoping to attend. Perhaps someone else could cover that date?"
"February 10 would be fine. April 3 is the week before [important deadline] and it might be kind of a crunch, so maybe someone else could teach on that day."
You can also ask for materials or other help that will lessen the amount of work for you.
"Sure, I can teach on January 30. Can you point out the specific sections in the book that I should cover? Will you be preparing notes for me to follow, or do you have notes from a previous semester? Can you suggest any particular examples that I should present? [etc...]"
With such assistance, covering a lecture should not end up taking an excessive amount of time away from your research. You really should only need to prepare and deliver the lecture - you likely won't have to deal with creating assignments, grading exams, supervising TAs, holding office hours, answering emails from students, or the other things that end up taking the majority of time when teaching.
This is an excellent answer!
"Covering classes is something that colleagues are expected to do for one another, within reason" Absolutely. And often times, people try to balance out, with the general idea being if someone covers for you, you'll be top of their list for who they ask to cover their class.
First, I agree with everything Nate Eldridge wrote in his excellent answer.
To add to that: you may think your job is only to do research, but the funding agency that provides the funds that pay your salary may not see things that way. Your PI pays you out of (I assume) a grant he got from the National Science Foundation or other similar government agency, as part of the grant’s “training” component, that is, the PI promised the agency to help train the future generation of researchers and educators (and the NSF cares about such things, including the teaching part, see here). One could make a very plausible argument that giving you some teaching experience is an essential part of that training. So, even aside from the fact Nate and others already explained that not being willing to do any lecturing will indeed come across as a black mark against you on an informal basis, you may also have a hard time arguing even at a purely formal level that lecturing is “not in your job description”.
Another thing to consider is the mindset of your PI, who as a regular faculty member likely teaches around 100 hours a year and also has many administrative duties, and yet manages to do productive research. From his point of view you have an incredible luxury to be able to focus essentially all your time on research. Depending on his personality and the level of stress he experiences from having such a workload, he may even be a bit resentful of you for having such unbridled freedom in comparison to him. From such a vantage point, a refusal on your part to take on just a few hours’ teaching load - a trivial amount, relatively speaking - is almost certain to appear selfish and immature.
Finally, to balance my answer a bit, I will go in the other direction and mention the possibility that a normally innocent request by a PI to his postdoc to teach a few lectures can in fact cross a line into potentially abusive behavior if the extent of the teaching grows above a certain point, especially if this is done without the knowledge and approval of the PI’s department. I have heard of cases of faculty who got their postdocs to do essentially all their teaching for them, and got in trouble for it. It would certainly be reasonable of you to be on your guard about a potential abuse of authority of this type, and to set a reasonable limit on the amount of teaching you are willing to do, and also ask some questions about whether this has been cleared with the department.
I would check with an NSF program officer or your Contracts & Grants office. If teaching is not written into the grant, this sounds like an unacceptable way to have the NSF pay for the university's instruction.
@ChrisK checking with people who know the rules is generally a good idea, but I disagree with your second sentence. The training of a postdoc assumes training them for an academic (and/or industry) careers, so some amount of teaching may be implicitly assumed even if teaching is not explicitly mentioned. Of course, the amount of teaching would be expected to roughly correspond to the emphasis put on teaching in the grant, but saying that any amount is “unacceptable” if teaching isn’t mentioned in the grant sounds incorrect to me.
I'm sure no one would care about a lecture or two here or there, but I've seen a university that had to pay a postdoc a week of salary for their teaching while they were otherwise supported by an NSF grant.
Your personal relationship with your advisor is probably a very important consideration. This might depend on your assessment of how he/she would react. But in general, it is probably a good idea to get the experience of lecturing in a way that involves only a short term commitment. While I think you can refuse, and most legal systems would back you up, it may not be wise to refuse.
But you might want to try to structure it so that you benefit maximally from the experience. For example, asking now for the opportunity to discuss things with your advisor after the first such lecture would be an advantage. Also, it puts an obligation on the PI.
Your future may depend on your relationship, but also on the breadth of experiences that you have as a student. You could think of it as an opportunity, rather than an obligation. The PI seems to trust you. That is a valuable thing in itself.
The short answer is: it depends.
The objective of a postdoc is to obtain sufficient research experience so that you are ready to be a 'grown-up' academic and university professor. This is achieved mostly by doing amazing research, but your PI's assessment of your work is a significant part of this. So I would say that even if you feel that this is taking up a significant chunk of your time, it's better to keep a good relationship with your PI, even it means a few hours lost to teaching.
That said, almost any academic position would require some teaching, and perhaps this is the PI's way of assessing your teaching capabilities so that they can make an educated statement in a future reference letter.
If it is just a few lecture hours, I personally would not make a big deal out of it. If they are asking you to grade exams/consult students or something more time consuming, perhaps it would be worthwhile to diplomatically discuss it ('are you sure that this is the best use of my time given that I am involved in two projects?').
If you feel like this is part of a growing pattern of assigning you a bunch of tasks not related to your research, it may be good to raise this issue.
You can.
But how do you see your career progressing? Perhaps a combination of research and a small amount of teaching could be good for you and, for the future students.
Your choice, so good luck anyway.
I had the Professors coming to me and saying, will you do X lectures, we have the pay rates already agreed and signed... And the material, examples, handouts all prepared, printed and ready to go...
Yes you can. How you do it is the key point you should worry about.
I was in the exact situation once before. As a 1st timer postdoc my supervisor came to me informally to ask whether I could lecture in his place in case he'd go for "trips". Immediately my internal alarms went off. Why did he drag me into a separate room, and why was he smiling so much? Clearly he was pushing beyond limits.
Still, I was quite friendly and open. I asked how did that contribute for my record with the department and project? I wanted certificates per each class given, and beforehand some rough estimation of how many classes to expect and more or less when. I emphasised on how time-consuming the project and writing of papers were sure to be. And I asked whether officially my postdoctoral funding rewarded or at least demanded giving out classes (e.g. how many hours).
He immediately realised the resistance. He said "Well, in case you don't want to help with classes, it's OK", to which I said, "of course I am available, but I must understand the official details before making plans."
In the end, I lectured about 6-8h in total, out of 3 years as a postdoctoral fellow in that lab. Surely it could have been more. My impression is that he was wary of "leaving for trips" and relying on me to cover him up. I bet he wasn't really communicating absences, where talking about official procedures gets a bit unsettling.
Thus, my advice is: don't let others abuse you, but make concessions where you see some clean opportunity for experience or "points" with the department. You do not depend on your supervisor for jobs later -- this is usually a myth and they won't move a finger in any direction.
You may not need the support of your supervisor to get a job after the post-doc, but you may well need it to get a particular job you want.
Agreed, especially if you want to stay exactly where you are as a postdoc, such as sharing the office with that person officially. Still, my experience has shown that typically a minion may stay as such indefinitely while the supervisor helps random others, if anyone at all. Never rely on someone proposing some exchange of favours, especially a superior at work.
But exchanges of "favors" is just how human groups operate. There are all kinds of things that have to get done at a job that nobody really wants to do. The person that refuses to do any of it to 'focus solely on their research' is quickly going to become isolated and ignored.
Unless you have a sociopath as boss, running accounts about services rendered vs. services obtained is not going to go down well. As PhD and postdoc I was generous with my time and was equally treated with generosity. And, if you do have a sociopath as boss, you should change jobs, anyway.
"The person that refuses to do any of it to 'focus solely on their research'" -- I agree, as you can read from my answer. But being 'always ready to do the work of others' can make someone quite popular... in the wrong way.
@CaptainEmacs This ex-supervisor was no sociopath. In fact he's remained as an old friend until this day. He's just pushy at times, and extremely lazy.
@Scientist Fair enough. Perhaps he felt guilty and does not mind getting push-back. However, with many people, if someone starts making accounts, others open accounts, too.
You should respectfully tell him to "Insert Coin" (but be careful)
Most post-doctoral positions involve research work under the supervision of a more senior researcher. They do not include teaching or institutional-administrative duties. This is related to their fixed- and short-term nature - and to their significantly lower pay.
With due respect to your PI - making precarious researchers serve as a backup teaching workforce is a further degradation of their (or should I say our) position in academia. So while - as @NateEldridge suggests - accepting a backup request is the collegiate thing to do, it is also collegiate for your PI to make sure you are then recognized as having been employed as a teacher, even if for a short period of time, and paid for it (with consideration of the extra relative overhead per class hour when you are teaching just once or twice).
With that said,
It is very possible that refusing will hurt your relationship with the PI and even threaten your continued employment - this depends on the specifics of the situation. It is still possible, though less likely, that even requiring formal recognition of this duty and payment will hurt your relationship.
Careful management of your rhetoric and order of actions (see @Scientist's answer) is important, regardless of what exactly you choose to do.
Ignoring the questions of status and rights, I would be disposed to help a colleague in need, as @NateEldridge suggests. You mentioned your wish to focus only on research - remember that, collectively, as academics we have an obligation to teach students, so it is important that someone competent cover for your PI.
Makes excellent point about "undermining time / compensation for teaching or institutional-administrative duties".
It's a nice thought, but I don't think it will work well in practice. In US academic culture, as I said, this is something that colleagues expect to do for one another, without extra pay. As such there do not exist any funds to pay people for covering lectures, and even if there were, I'd expect the bureaucracy needed to make it happen would be prohibitive. So asking for payment will be seen as asking for something unreasonable and out of the ordinary, a more annoying way of saying "no". The PI will say "Forget it, I'll ask someone else", and will retain a memory of you as unhelpful.
@NateEldredge: When both colleagues get paid, then sure. When one gets paid significantly more than the other, then - perhaps in US Professorial culture post-docs are expected to do this. And post-docs may expect being pressured into doing this. Also, note I didn't suggest that you ask the PI for money, just that you ask him/her to make it official, so that the university (which pays him/her) will need to pay you. And I did acknowledge this could be poorly received.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.455911 | 2018-11-06T14:05:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/119614",
"authors": [
"Captain Emacs",
"Chris H",
"Chris K",
"Clayton",
"Dan Romik",
"David Richerby",
"Dmitry Savostyanov",
"Jon Custer",
"Kimball",
"Mr. Unnormalized Posterior",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Notso",
"Scientist",
"darij grinberg",
"dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten",
"einpoklum",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35918",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4249",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47826",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66782",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81740",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8494",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97262",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97835",
"penelope",
"user0721090601"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
161412 | To what extent is the students' perspective on the lecturer credible?
I am giving a master course with another colleague, but since I am more experienced in the subject, I took the most difficult lectures.
My lectures contain a lot of mathematical equations and require deep knowledge in algebra. I tried to make them as easy as possible and even made extra videos to explain parts which I felt were difficult. I checked all available lectures to make sure I explain well. Therefore, I find my lectures among the most intuitive and informative ones.
It seems that my students (or most of them) are not that good in mathematics and found the lectures very difficult. They are rating my lectures with very bad scores although I made a lot of effort in these lectures (I have been teaching this subject for several years) this year as they are online. I see my colleagues just recording their old lectures.
As a lecturer, I try to transfer knowledge, so satisfying my students is my priority. However, I feel that my efforts were not acknowledged and I have lost motivation to prepare good lectures. I am planning to simply record lectures and read the slides as most of the lecturers at my university are doing.
Did anyone go through this? Also, how informative is this evaluation to me? In other words, how credible is it to validate if there is really an issue with my lectures or if it is just a biased opinion?
EDIT
It seems that the students are comparing my lectures and the lectures of my colleague with whom I am sharing the course. I assume they think the difficulty of the lectures is related to the lecturer and not the topic.
Good to see that you care about teaching; many academics just simply do not care. I think your problem could be the prerequisite of your subject. Another on-going challenge is that you are teaching mathematics. Many (or most) students are not taught maths properly, so they absolutely hate it no matter how you sugar coat it. If you cannot change the pre-requisite, then you need to aim lower. Start from their level and built it up. This may mean the students will never get to where you want them to be.
Have you asked for specific feedback?
Perhaps the students are not sufficiently aware of what they'll need to know for the course assignments, tests, final exam, etc. That is, they may not be fully aware that if you don't include the mathematical parts of your subject in your lectures, then they will have to learn it on their own for upcoming tests. Or maybe they feel that the mathematical parts should not be covered or tested on, as they feel it is outside the scope of the subject? And relevant to all this is whether other instructors of the same material at the same intended level teach with the same level of mathematics.
@Prof.SantaClaus: the problem is often not the prereq but that the students have been barely passing each prereq, without gaining any effective knowledge. Then you find yourself trying to teach calculus to people who don't know what a function is, don't know what the graph of a function is, cannot do any algebraic manipulation, think that the only solution of x^2=x is x=1 and that sqrt{x^2}=x; they have zero familiarity with trigonometric functions, and they don't know that 3/2 and 1.5 are the same number; and, of course, addition of fractions is out of the question.
@MartinArgerami: I'm ashamed how long it took me to find the other solution of x**2 = x.
Curious what the subject is, exactly. You say it requires, " deep knowledge in Algebra". Do you mean school (high school) algebra? Abstract algebra?
With all the positive feedback around here, I'd like to give a caveat: we don't know if your class is taught well. I feel there is to much bias to comforting you in the answers. I do know teachers that give their best and, well, it still isn't good. Now please note, I'm not saying this is the case here. But you should ask for honest feedback someone who can actually judge your class.
I'm not sure it's allowed but, perhaps you could give us a link to one of your lectures?
"I find my lectures..." - judging one's own work comes with a huge amount of bias. Some judge their work too harshly and some judge it too generously, and it's quite difficult to know how someone else might see it (especially for teaching, where you know the content and they don't). Many professions involve having work reviewed by someone else (or working together) for this (and some other) reasons. An explicit review step isn't so much a thing in lecturing as far as I know, but student ratings or reviews can serve the same purpose (if you can contextualise it properly).
I think vital info that you failed to exclude is how the students did in the course. Did they learn the material well?
The class is online - 'nuff said. Learning mathematics purely online without specific, realtime feedback is already an extremely difficult task - made more difficult by the new content of your lectures. Seems to be a symptom of the learning environment, not your content.
Intention is not enough, the impact has to be there. You could attempt to teach less as long as the material is adopted well - not to suggest you would do this. But offering assistance outside of lectures (even going so far as to offer additional classes outside of course hours) might encourage those who are struggling to take the initiative. In any case, breaking down the concepts and explaining the way of looking at problems helps - I find in maths those who know assume those who are listening know (we don't, we weren't taught to comprehend /why/ maths works in school just that -it does-).
Did you ask for specific feedback? Are the lectures difficult because the maths are hard to understand, or because you're hard to understand? I have had some profs who were terrible at public speaking but completely oblivious to that fact. And because they're experts in the material they teach, bad slides and explanations seem very clear to them.
What I don't see in your post is what is the nature of the subject and what the background of the students are. If you are a mathematics lecturer and you are giving a class to business students expecting them to react the way a class of math students would, then you will likely be disappointed. I did my undergrad in Chem Engineering. Most (not all) math profs hated teaching engineers and treated our lectures as punishment for past sins. Most chemistry profs felt the same way - though one first-timer felt we were so different from Chem students that he thought it was a blast.
Student feedback can sometime be a difficult thing for a teacher, and it is sometimes inappropriate that teaching quality is measured in terms of student feedback.
Let me explain this by means of anecdotes. Imagine a colleague who is a good performer, much as a stand-up comedy act. They give good jokes, tell stories, show interesting films. How would many students rate them? Quite a few students might give them a good rating on the basis that they had a good time. However ask them in five or ten years time what they got out of that class, and they might remember one of the jokes or stories.
Now imagine a colleague who works their class. Makes them do test and examples. Makes them go places that makes them think, makes their brains ache from the thinking they had to do. It is possible that quite a few students might really give some negative feedback that this was a class they did not enjoy and might have liked to be changed. However, ask some of these students in five or ten years what they got out of that class and it might surprise you. It might be that they remember what they were taught and use it in their profession.
Good teaching can be preparation for the future and sometimes students can only discover that when they reach their own futures. I started to find this out when I would get unexpected emails saying "remember me". "I didn't believe you when you taught me that thing, and now I see that lesson playing out in front of my eyes every day. Thank You."
We have to balance those two aspects of teaching. We have to give them something for their now and something for their future. In fact something for our future and our grand-children's future, because that is what we build by good teaching.
As has been said by others: if you care, you will find ways to improve. You are doing the right things. Keep going. Best of luck.
"Ask them [the students] in five or ten years" is, in my opinion, the right way to evaluate teachers, but of course it may be difficult to find the students and get their answers long after they've left the university. My department at least asks them as they're about to graduate.
It's also worth remembering that most students are adults and can also understand the difference between a jokester that doesn't teach them anything and someone who gives them useful knowledge and effectively explains why behind the knowledge.
Let's remember this isn't 5 year olds we're talking about. At my organization the student grading roughly matches the perception of effectiveness and the most easy going teachers do not hold best student grades.
@Mavrik In the past, there were societies where people were not considered to be "adult" until they were 50 years old. Changing the age threshold to 21 (or 18, or 16) hasn't changed human behaviour much.
@Mavrik even older adults often have a hard time evaluating teachers for something they don't know yet. In addition, emotional responses to character types or just as a mechanism to externalize guilt when some concepts don't get easily in your head are pretty universal independent of age. While the skill to recognize this may grow once you have been through a certain degree of learning, I think you will find it in all age groups. I've often seen very mixed evaluations for teachers that teach topics that are conceptually different from the other ones (and laying groundwork in that area).
This really doesn't change the fact that treating a whole generation of educated adults, who voluntarily enrolled into higher education, as children is horriblty condescending.
I'd add that this problem of not recognizing the value of what's in front of you is not unique to the education setting. It is almost invariably the case that any review given during or immediately after some kind of dense experience is going to be worthless. Just ask young Mark Twain what he thought of his father. Perspective takes time -- not necessarily years, but anything less than 24 hours of distance and reflection, and the opinion isn't worth the paper its written on.
@Mavrik Horribly condescending but unfortunately mostly accurate. Also, "voluntarily" doesn't feel entirely appropriate; a large majority of students is just following expectations while giving the bare minimum of effort or thought to what they are doing, or why they are doing it. Chalking up a poor grade to "bad teacher" is one way of doing this.
This assumes that there does not exist a golden middle, where you teach solidly, challenging and rigorous AND manage to captivate your audience while doing it. Feynman did both.
This answer comes across incredibly patronizingly. Student reviews are not just based on popularity like this answer implies
As a student I disagree with this standpoint. I generally don't conflict being funny with good teaching. When I think about the best teachers I've had I think about an organized course, good use of board/powerpoint/whatever, teaching at an appropiate level such that we can understand and made challenging but fair tests. The worst teachers rambled on during the lecture, didn't seem to care if we understand or had poor time management (went overtime). But I do agree that students may not always be the best judges.
@AccidentalTaylorExpansion I think there are two classes of student--the ones who only look at easy/hard, and the ones that look at actual learning. Back when I was a student I considered the opinions of good students worthwhile, the opinions of poor students were inversely related to the value of the class. I'd love to see a teacher rating system where it was organized by GPA.
Anecdotal, but the belief with student feedback at one university was "bad ratings mean a lot, good ratings mean little", as the belief was indeed that 'a hard class is maybe going to get "meh" ratings, but it still shouldn't get outright bad ratings as there are enough students who appreciate them', whilst 'an easy or funny class is often going to get very good ratings'. So only the most negative cases were actively looked into, whilst the feedback was completely ignored beyond that.
I'm aware of a variant of this: the same course is given by two different instructors in back to back terms; one of the instructor is "hard" and tenured, the other is "soft" and a sessional. Over the years the students have increasingly avoided the class of one to the benefit of the other.
Maybe this quote from Daniel Webster is slightly messianic, but nevertheless:
I should indeed like to please you; but I prefer to save you, what
ever be your attitude toward me.
In the end, you should do what you think is best. You should still reflect on the difficulty of your lectures (is it really necessary?) but it's a pretty universal observation that students disproportionately prefer "softer" instructors simply because of the short term workload differential. Regrettably many students (and their parents) are more interested in getting a degree than getting an education.
For completeness: the students favored the softer one?
It's perhaps also worth remember that a teacher that's being avoided by students cannot really teach anything useful.
@Mayou36 yes. The scheduling favours the regular faculty member but despite this students naturally gravitate to the “softer” instructor.
@Mavrik That’s true literally - if there is 0 student in the class you cannot teach anything useful - but I would challenge this in general. An instructor could teach nothing and give high grades, and be better liked than one who would shy away from doing this. Such a situation happened in a developing country (because of low salaries): the instructor had another better paying job and just didn’t show up at the lectures yet gave every student A+.
I think the point raised is rather another (or I bring that up now): the amount and difficulty taught and what is received by the students is a function with a maximum somewhere. Teaching simple, slow won't make the student remember a lot. However, teaching too hard things too fast won't make them learn a lot either. The optimum is somewhere in between. So you can simply overshoot as well! Like with sports: use to light weights and you won't train, use to heavy weights and you can't even do a single exercise. The right amount of difficult is the best teacher.
@ZeroTheHero Honestly, my experience doesn't quite match your statements - the best graded teaches at my faculty aren't the most easygoing ones, but the ones that are kind but still demanding and effective teachers. The notion that teachers giving cheap grades are best rated ones simply doesn't hold water when looked at empirically.
Still, my point stands: if students actively avoid enrolling to your class, you won't each anything. There's a tradeoff there and you can be demanding, kind and effective teacher. Those are orthogonal properties.
@Mavrik I agree in some cases but teaching evaluation is dependent on lots of other factors as well. I’m not suggesting that kind=“soft” or unkind=“hard”, simply observing that students (with exceptions) prefer good marks over pretty much anything else.
@Mayou36 agreed; this is why the reflection of the OP is quite important.
You say:
My lectures contain a lot of mathematical equations and require deep knowledge in Algebra. I tried to make them as easy as possible and even made extra videos to explain parts which I felt were difficult. I checked all available lectures to make sure I explain well. Therefore, I find my lectures among the most intuitive and informative ones.
You put a lot of effort in, but is it effective? The problem is that you are trying to determine whether the material is hard before, and after, watching your lectures. But you already know this material thoroughly, and have lots of subconscious background knowledge. It's impossible for you to truly judge your work as it'll be seen through the eyes of student for whom it is all new.
You also say:
Did anyone go through this? Also, how informative is this evaluation to me? In other words, how credible is it to validate if there is really an issue with my lectures or if it is just a biased opinion?
I'd say it's credible, but not informative. The students are having difficulty with your lectures, they're probably honest about that. They haven't offered very useful feedback for you to improve however.
I think you can kill two birds with one stone here. Involve your students in improving your lectures. Every lecture, contact some of the students to review the lecture. Assure them that they can speak freely and that you're intererested in their detailed feedback. Explain to them where you want to go, and ask them what they would need to get there. Then use that feedback for the next lecture. This should accomplish two things: (1) you get much better estimates of what is hard for them and where they need more help, and (2) the students feel involved in the quality of the lectures, which is very likely to boost their reviews.
This does increase your upfront workload, at least initially, because you can't pre-record all your lectures at the start of the semester anymore. However, it will also allow you to target your efforts more effectively.
Although the other answers aren't wrong, I think they're a bit too negative about students and feedback. I think there's a substantial share of students that do want to learn a lot, and that get quite enthusiastic and helpful if you involve them. Not all of them, but enough to make a difference.
Yes! This (in a much less comprehensive manner with worse examples) is what I wanted to write before I got to your answer. :)
I'd use an anonymous online form for feedback instead of contacting "some" of the students (which ones? why them?) or "assuring them that they can speak freely": this is vague and I am not sure what this is supposed to imply (that you won't grade them differently? IMO you can't promise you won't have biases).
I think having an actual face to face (well, over Skype or something) dialogue is more useful. It doesn't have to be about feedback on the course alone. In my experience as TA and student in the past year, 15-30m one on one talks with students have been extremely valuable. You can't really predict what topics will come up. Usually the students have at least some issue they need help with that wasn't originally on the agenda, but which might have never come to light otherwise.
Student perceptions are perfectly credible viewed from their own perspective. But they may not have universal validity.
Yes, you are suffering from the comparison with the other instructor based on the difference in difficulty of the material as perceived by the students. I suspect the exercises you give are also harder for them. Hopefully others will understand that such a thing is natural and that students can confuse such things as you note in your edit.
But teaching is about student learning and that takes hard work on their part, which they don't always recognize.
You didn't ask for a suggestion, but I'd recommend that you mix up the material a bit more. Your colleague would probably also benefit from the challenge of teaching harder material. You can assist them in this, of course.
But I agree with Prof. Santa Claus that you are doing well to care about teaching and the students. You might mention the issue to the department head to give them some foreknowledge of what is going on.
There is plentiful research to show that student evaluations are not a good way to measure the quality of teaching. See for example Clayson, 2008. That doesn't mean they are completely useless however. I am lucky that my department doesn't use teaching evals in our annual appraisal. I use evals in two ways: I look to explain a large difference in scores between years. Did something go wrong/right this year? Did I substantially change the material this year? If I'd made the material harder, I wouldn't neccessary worry about a drop in score, but if the score dropped when I hadn't then it might be worth investigating.
I also tend to look at the free-text feedback to find specific and actionable feedback. For example, when I started teach stats 101, I got a lot of feedback from student saying they didn't understand why it was relevant to their biology degrees, so I changed the program to spend longer talking about why it was important, and spent some time showing how each example was relevant to real biological problems.
how informative is this evaluation to me?
The information you got is that students think your lectures are "difficult" and "bad." This is not informative.
I suspect your real question is: "How do I get useful student feedback?" which is a very broad question.
Some starting points are:
Identify learning objectives.
Form a hypothesis about how students achieve the objectives.
Ask students questions that test the hypothesis.
Change your teaching based on the results.
You should also take care to:
Assess students' abilities before you teach them. This avoids the situation where it turns out at the end that students were "bad at math."
Do more than "knowledge transfer." Have students practice learning objectives. At the university level, some of those objectives should be more than just "knowing."
There are a variety of places you can get formal training that will help you. If you do not have one locally, you might try http://cirtl.net/.
Its also important to take on board that some learning objectives may simply not be possible given where the majority of your students are starting.
I propose that the student feedback saying the lectures “difficult” and “bad” are informative. They say that OP needs to make a change to his teaching style. This answer offers some good suggestions to do that however
Students are not perfect judges. They are not even impartial. In fact, they are often very, very biased!
Differing motivations. Perhaps they are interested in your course. Or perhaps they are merely satisfying requirements.
Grading. The higher the grade you give them, the more positive their response will be.
Lack of reference point. Students may not have a reference point for what constitutes a "good teacher" for the course.
Perception. If students feel like they've been given a better deal in some factor (e.g. final grade, amount learned, effort spent) than they would have otherwise, you might get a more positive response.
When performing (or presenting) to an audience, the content is not necessarily the most important thing. A magician that performs a simple card trick well might be more interesting and memorable than another magician that escapes from a straitjacket while hanging upside down over a bed of nails. It depends greatly upon the presentation and how it made the audience feel.
Perhaps simplified content is not enough to earn the love of an audience. (Without a reference point, they may not even be aware that it is simplified!) You also need to make yourself appear to be a good teacher. There are various ways you might go about communicating this. Some positive ways include: more interactive lectures, questions, discussions, greeting the audience, smiles and warmth.
Perhaps some of these views are a bit cynical, but we are dealing with humans after all. And humans are quite illogical.
Coming from an masters student perspective: I would agree with you and say that course evals are generally of little use (except when they are wayy below or above the median)
Indeed it's been proven that using methods that improve learning often makes students frustrated and confused while normal lectures make the students learn less but are more enjoyable, more familiar and students have also been brainwashed to think good lecture equal good class. Famous experiment with a video teaching students physics, many students, thanks to confirmation bias and only paying half attention, felt like they learned but learned the wrong things.
Do the same thing where an actor in the video gives the wrong explanation and is corrected the students will learn more but leave the classroom more frustrated and confused.
The best thing to do from a student eval perspective is to inflate your stats by being funny and lecturing well and yes, even making things easy.
You gotta remember the median students want an A not subject mastery. Though this isnt as bad as it sounds, because most of education is signaling anyway, so its not like by being funny and not maximizing the learning and whatnot your short changing students, quite the opposite.
Personally, I think the best teachers play to both types of students simultainously, which is of course, tricky.
"Indeed it's been proven that using methods that improve learning often makes students frustrated and confused while normal lectures make the students learn less but are more enjoyable". Who proved that? Is that some known pedagogy fact?
it appears to not exist. woopsies.
I could swear that there was some meta-study that found that undergraduate students prefer passive learning to active learning, but I cannot find it, so it probably does not exist.
It's probably a combination of the entire course being difficult and you taking the difficult topics. The students don't know your lectures are inherently tougher, so they assume you're worse at explaining things.
I'd do 2 things. Look at the previous courses. They may be weaker than you'd assume, or simply terrible. I remember a Computer Programming-II course where it took me a few weeks to learn their CS-I was "principles" and a few small programs, so I toned things down. Then I had a section that I couldn't reach at all -- turns out they'd never written a program in their CS-I or even seen the language. I had as much trouble with a 3rd "cadre" and later found out it was them -- every other instructor also found them very unmotivated.
I'd also check whether it was an elective or required. I've found electives tend to get more serious, motivated students and if they aren't happy, it's probably my fault. Then also how it was advertised. Maybe it sounded like a simple class (after an experience I've always wondered if students see College Algebra and think "oh, I had that in my Jr. High").
Second. I'd compare notes with the co-instructor. I've only co-taught where each has their own section. Swapping lectures seems especially difficult. The other instructor may be slowing down when students aren't understanding, covering less. There may be a slight mismatch of terms, style of examples... which the students are picking up on, making it seem like 2 separate courses.
With my each-their-own-section co-teaching we had hour-long weekly meetings. With alternate lectures I'd almost want to meet for a bit after each lecture "how'd it go, where did you leave off?"
A few points in additiont to the existing answers:
since I am more experienced in the subject, I took the most difficult lectures.
IMHO in this particular situation, it may be good to tell the students beforehand that you are supposed to cover the "hard" topics. This may help them to differentiatiate topic from presentation of the topic.
IMHO the more specific feedback you ask, the easier to sort out general good/bad feelings from constructive feedback.
E.g. ask for examples of what was explained well and what wasn't and why (if possible), and do so timely (i.e. directly after each lecture).
I find my lectures among the most intuitive and informative ones.
I've also honed some explanations over time to be very concise and hopefully intuitive. However, I think that particular ways of explaining (mind models) may be intuitive for one group of learners but to others some other way may be more intuitive. I think it possible that at this point your lecture would gain more from adding alternative ways of explanation rather than from further honing of the way that is intuitive to you.
Unfortunately, finding such alternatives is not easy at all. I think you've already done a good step in this direction by looking at how your colleagues approach the topic. However, I've once heard a lecture by someone from math didactics who made some (to me) very important points. One of them was that she told us (an audience coming entirely from STEM fields) that we are likely very similar in which (maths) explanation approaches do make intuitive sense to us: we're very likely self-selected with a liking for e.g. mathematical thinking. So are teachers (of any field). However, the student population may not be, meaning that there may be groups of students who'd do better with other approaches.
I can personally confirm that as undergrads in chemistry we had a physical chemistry professor who came from physics and we decidedly had the impression that his explanations just didn't "click" as well with our chemist mind-set as they'd have done with physics undergrads. So this may happen already with rather closely related fields.
And I've gotten feedback in a somewhat similar situation where a student heard both me (chemist) and a physicist colleague on the same topic and told me that it was completely worth while since we took quite different approaches to the same topic and thus they learned a lot by now having more and different "links".
I may add that I also enjoy hearing colleagues' explainations for the same reason: there cannot be too many different links in knowledge.
Now, lecture schedules usually do not allow time for multiple explanations, but
Over here (Germany), courses usually do not follow one textbook, but students are referred to a a bunch of (text)books. When I was a student, we were encouraged to work with whatever textbook on the topic we found suitable for us (also the library typically had different textbooks available).
You could consider presenting a different approach when a student asks about a topic.
The math didiactician told us that one of their most valuable tools is asking students to write down (e.g. as homework) how they's explain the topic, or have them explain it to each other and take notes of this.
Somewhat related, I took the teacher training with the carpentries where I learned that well-designed multiple choice questions can be used to get a quick overview over existing misconceptions/misunderstandings. In contrast to the explain-to-each-other appoach, multiple choice can of course test only for misunderstandings you are aware of.
First, congratulations for caring about teaching.
My lectures contain a lot of mathematical equations and require deep knowledge in algebra.
You did not mention the topic of your lecture, but (and really, I am not trying to argue about something I do not know) do they really need to know that?
If they need because otherwise it is not possible to have the course (say - not knowing what a derivative is and explaining what velocity is in a physics course for physicists) then please just skip this answer.
Otherwise:
My teaching experience
When doing my PhD in Physics I was giving lectures to students of biology. This was a course that was part of their curriculum (actually two: physics and biophysics).
The people who decided on the curriculum probably had not much contact with the real world outside of academia that will welcome these students once they leave the university - in practical terms, they will never ever need to understand how the Zeta function is used in some physical context. (They will never use the word Zeta while we are at it).
So I simplified it to the extreme. I went for very, very basic math in order for them to understand the core of what they need to understand. I lied (ok, simplified) many times so that they get a grasp of the topic. I suffered by telling things that are only rough approximations but at least they understood basic things.
Note that they would have never used the original content in life, at least now they can read their electricity bill.
I was very hard on exams, though - because if someone does not make the effort to understand the topics (not to learn them, to actually understand) at the basic level then there is no pity (they are either lazy or dumb. Or I may be a bad teacher).
They had usually good marks because they cared about understanding something they could understand.
My life after academia
I left academia after my PhD and went into industry. It is now 25 years and I am faced with math and physics again when helping my children.
I forgot everything in physics but is it is easy to get back on track because I had two teachers like you: they made me understand. The advanced stuff I had to pass an exam on looks like a miracle today, but the bases are there and I am a good teacher to my kids (because I understand what I am saying, and use the right level of abstraction).
To summarize
thanks for making the effort
make sure that what you are teaching is what they need to know
there is a real chance that they will see you as a great teacher if they are taught the things they actually need
some will tell stories about you 30 years from now
Should they be able to do that maths?
In my uni course (electronic and electrical engineering), we had compulsory maths in the first and second years. In theory, this was supposed to teach us the maths skills we'd need for the rest of the course. In fact, no-one had told the maths lecturer what we'd need. The result was that basically the whole of second-year maths was 100% wasted effort with no application to our other modules; whilst two modules in the third year (modern control theory and electromagnetism) required matrix operations which we had never seen before, and which the lecturer did not have time to teach properly whilst also teaching the actual course content.
We all appreciated that the lecturers were in a situation not of their making. However on course feedback we all gave negative feedback on those modules, because the engineering department as an organisation had failed to teach in a way which allowed their students to learn properly.
If your students are having problems with this, I suspect there is a very high likelihood that you are in the same situation. Your first step should be talking to your students to find where they learnt how to do this maths. If in fact they never did, or if the teaching was not rigorous enough to allow them to succeed in your class, then you urgently need your department to review the teaching structure.
To answer the question specifically I think the student feedback is valid and you should put it in context of your own evaluation of their learning. What you have learned is that they do not find your lectures helpful and find your teaching difficult to follow. If this is coupled with your students not doing well on assessments then it seems you did fail to teach them, plain and clear.
You mention the caveat that you think they disliked your lectures based on the algebra that you used to on them. I personally don’t think this demonstrates that your students arent prepared for the course but rather that you didnt use algebra in a clear manner. In my experience taking undergrad and graduate courses it is very easy to obfuscate the point of your teaching by wasting time doing algebra in front of them. This is simply fatiguing to follow and might not be the best way to teach.
Other answers suggest that the feedback wasnt helpful because they didnt give you suggestions to improve but I personally think that the student reviews do not serve that purpose , but instead give just an indication of how the students perceive the class. Then paired with the students objective performance in the class provide an indication of whether you failed or succeeded to effectively teach
I would say that your experience is one of the most basic reasons why professors used to have tenures. Tenure was an acknowledgement that a professor is expert in its field and able to teach. With tenures becoming rarer and rarer, more lecturers are falling in the trap you found in. With universities caving in to student opinion, this may go horribly wrong in the future.
Myself, I do care about student opinion, because university makes me to think about it basically every day. I am successful and apparently highly respected by students, but still unsure whether I should be harder on them and care less about what they think of me.
This is not much of help in your current situation, I understand. My best advice would be to avoid such situations where students can directly compare you to other lecturers, as these comparisons can be highly unfair. There is also another point you may think about: how does self-selection bias influence student opinion about you? I have recent experience where there was a questionnaire sent out to the students about the quality of online lectures in time of COVID. The feedback was pretty bad, but there was only one student who submitted any kind of feedback! I have the option to do such survey myself, anonymously for students, and when half of them responded, the feedback was actually pretty good - they were satistfied with the lectures and did not even to bother to provide any kind of feedback to the University, when asked before.
So, think of this too - who is complaining, and whether they are representative sample of your student body.
EDIT: I am not sure why this is getting negative grades, so I will clarify that: It is university's job to employ good lecturers, and student's opinion should not have too much weight precisely because the dilemma described by the OP. Placing too much weight on student opinion is University's way of acknowledging that their committees who select professors are not doing their job and really puts University's administration in a bad light.
Based on what you are judging my experience? Why you link being tenure or professor to give good lectures and to ask questions. I think even if I am close to retirement, it is always good to improve the quality of teaching and ask questions.
Btw, sometimes, my PhD students give better lectures than me and other tenures and professors.
Based on your question. If you don't like honest answers, don't ask questions. My answer was honest, borne out of experience and intended to help you. No need to get hostile on me. And to add explanation: tenure is a way for professors so they can lecture without a fear to getting "bad grades" from students that even should be in his/hers class. And to add the final answer: it is the university's responsibility to choose and employ good lecturers. So the "opinion" of the students is NOT crediblem precisely due to reasons YOU argued. I agree with you, but I am not sure you understood that.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.457647 | 2021-01-16T20:25:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/161412",
"authors": [
"AccidentalTaylorExpansion",
"Andreas Blass",
"Aubreal",
"Capsule",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"Dave L Renfro",
"David Mulder",
"DonQuiKong",
"Eric Duminil",
"Flydog57",
"Frank Hopkins",
"Ian Sudbery",
"JCool",
"Loren Pechtel",
"Martin Argerami",
"Mavrik",
"Mayou36",
"NotThatGuy",
"ObscureOwl",
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"Servaes",
"SnakeDoc",
"Stian",
"Tom",
"Vix",
"ZeroTheHero",
"alephzero",
"chasly - supports Monica",
"coredump",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/100112",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101521",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/102417",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111388",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111891",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11353",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115975",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/120328",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/122202",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129613",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21493",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37082",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47727",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49593",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51476",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52338",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/542",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5840",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65512",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69345",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7024",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77932",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80769",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82972",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83436",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84836",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/88082",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/90441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97648",
"jDAQ",
"mishan",
"user111388",
"user74671",
"xmp125a"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
124037 | Is it unethical to supply a marked solution to a student who has shown intent to cheat, with the intent of identifying them for punishment?
One of the adjuncts that I work with found that one of their students had posted their assignment on a freelancer website asking for the solution. We joked that he should place a bid and fail them afterwards and had a lengthy discussion about sting operations and entrapment. In the end we came to the conclusion we were not the police and to let the chair know, but ultimately take no action.
I was wondering about the ethics of anonymously giving this student a marked solution with the goal of identifying the student and removing them from the class. In particular, I'm imagining we could write a correct solution with some additional embedded information that will be recognizable when the student turns in their answer (for example, extraneous steps that don't break the solution but don't add any value).
Some additional clarifications:
Assume that the student clearly only wants the solutions for a grade and is not asking for assistance in understanding the material
This would be done as a private transfer of documents (like email), not a public posting (like a Stack Overflow answer), to avoid issues of other students stumbling upon the personalized solution.
We would provide the correct solution, but with some additional embedded data that identifies the source; for example, metadata, comments, and, in the case of code, extraneous steps that don't break the solution, but don't add any value.
corresponding question for the legal side: https://law.stackexchange.com/q/36748
Related, and you might be interested: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/65485/moral-dilemma-in-unwittingly-being-paid-to-complete-a-students-work
Answers in comments, obsolete remarks and other digressed discussions have been moved to chat. Please read this FAQ before posting another comment.
[We] had a lengthy discussion about sting operations and entrapment
The distinction between the two is important here. A sting catches someone doing something they were already going to do. Entrapment is where you trick them into doing it in the first place. If you posted an advertisement offering to solve the assignment for them, and some students took you up on that, that would be entrapment, and would definitely be unethical: they might not have cheated if you hadn't posted the advertisement.
But in this case, they have already chosen to cheat. The only thing you can change is whether the assignment that they cheated on is easily recognizable as such. In some cases, it's hard to distinguish between a sting and entrapment. That isn't the case here; there's a (presumably) timestamped job posting the proves they were planning to do this before you got involved.
You should still definitely run this by the department chair or someone first if you decide to do it, though. It looks similar to entrapment even though it isn't, and it's better to justify your actions before you do them, instead of letting it be an unpleasant surprise when the student complains later.
The fact that you'd be getting paid to do the assignment is an issue, as well. Returning the fee to the cheater after catching them probably addresses this issue. (And maybe turn it over to the department in the meantime, to avoid the appearance of potential impropriety.)
Edit: A comment requested an unambiguous conclusion, so:
My view is that it is ethical, but it's very close to the border, and either encouraging cheating that would not have otherwise happened or profiting from the actions you take would push it over to the unethical side. And because it's so close, it's important to have some amount of transparency (e.g. by telling the department chair in advance) so as to avoid both the potential for and appearance of impropriety.
On top of that - the establishment might not want to know who the cheater is; as they might suspect that it's someone who made a substantial donation to the body and intentionally want to close their eyes to it. (sad but true) As such, ensuring that you've got the go ahead will prevent any anger getting directed at you when their donation is retracted.
"If you posted an advertisement offering to solve the assignment for them, and some students took you up on that, that would be entrapment, and would definitely be unethical: they might not have cheated if you hadn't posted the advertisement."
Maybe colloquially, but I believe legally the definition is much more strict. I don't buy that it's "unethical" either - if they're so willing to cheat all it takes is an advertisement of cheating services, there isn't much moral difference between putting out an advert and responding to one put out by them. See http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=633
Entrapment isn't when someone "might not have done" something without your involvement, it's when someone didn't have the inclination without your pressuring them. Answering an ad is just going undercover. Putting out an ad is a sting operation. Entrapment would be something like getting a student drunk and then offering to sell a solution.
“In this case, they have already chosen to cheat.” No they haven’t, or at least if they’ve “chosen” they haven’t actually followed up on that choice, and might still change their mind. Conspiring to do something wrong (and even doing things that take you part of the way there, like posting an ad online) isn’t the same as actually doing the wrong thing. For example if I post an ad online trying to hire a hit man to kill someone, of course I’d be guilty of a conspiracy crime, which is bad, but only if someone actually ends up being killed will I be charged with a much worse murder offense.
@DanRomik Attempting to commit a crime is also a crime in many cases (attempted murder being the most well known example.) They are attempting to cheat. Whether they fail to do so may have practical consequences, but ethically speaking, the choice has already been made. (I like the distinction you made in your answer about punishing them for soliciting solutions rather than for submitting them. I personally believe that you'd be justified in punishing them for both, but doing it your way does avoid some moral ambiguity.)
@Acccumulation You may be right about posting an advertisement not being entrapment. I lack the expertise to say, and can't think of a better example at the moment. But the important thing here is that answering an existing ad definitely isn't.
@ray fine - as I said I’m in agreement that the student has already offended. I don’t have a strong opinion about whether “conspiracy” or “attempt” is the more accurate term for their offense. The point is that even an attempt is still not the same as the “real thing” - that’s why attempted murder and murder are two separate crimes. So IMO, there is an ethical distinction about whether the goal of the sting operation is to catch the student and punish them for the attempt/conspiracy (carried out before the sting), or for the actual cheating (potentially done as a result of the sting).
@DanRomik With your criteria, we couldn't do anything about a student who's obviously looking at somebody else's exam. We'd have to wait until they actually find then write the answer they're looking for from their neighbor? So they'd be able to correctly argue "I wasn't cheating, I needed question 4, but my neighbor only had question 2 open"
@user71659: having been in a situation exactly like that ("But I couldn't read anything" - with the "source" turning around "Are you saying my handwriting is not legible!?") as a fresh TA, I then was taught that my word that the student did cheat is not sufficient to take action against the student. Warning the student off ("Keep your eyes on your own sheets") In hindsight, I could have relocated the student to a seat where they could not possibly read another student's sheets.
@user71659 I did not mean for my “criteria” to be interpreted in such an absurd way. A student who’s looking at another student’s exam for an extended period of time is obviously cheating - there is no need to wait to find a copied answer. And a student who’s advertising to hire a freelancer to do their homework is already committing some kind of academic misconduct (if you think “cheating” is the right name for it, I guess that’s reasonable, although a tad imprecise IMO). But a student who is actually submitting someone else’s HW is committing CHEATING, bigtime - definitely a worse offense.
It is unethical if you plan to punish them for the offense you are “stinging” them to commit (submitting under their own name an assignment done by someone else). But I think it’s ethical, though potentially still problematic, if you plan to only punish them for the offense they have already committed (soliciting solutions for a homework assignment on a freelancer website), and are only engaging in the “sting” to solve the practical problem of identifying the student who has committed that offense.
The point is that there are two dishonest, punishable acts beings discussed here, one that was already committed and the other that is at this point only (presumably) contemplated. The student has already done something that violates most universities’ code of conduct by posting online the solicitation for someone else to do their homework assignment. It would be completely reasonable for you to punish them if you knew who they were. So I don’t see an ethical issue with a sting operation carried out exclusively for the purpose of finding the identity of the offending student, which effectively can be regarded as doing detective work to catch a cheater. You should also plan (and document the plan in writing and/or by telling about it to a trusted party) to give back to the student any money they pay you for the freelance work, to avoid any accusations of acting out of an ulterior motive or having a conflict of interests.
As for punishing the student for the (more egregious) future offense, which at this point is still hypothetical, you should keep in mind that without your “sting” the student might well end up failing to find a freelancer to help them cheat, or simply have a change of heart at the last minute. I think it would be pretty obviously unethical to actively assist them in cheating, which actually increases the chance that they will engage in this behavior, and then punish them for that cheating. The student would be very likely to argue that they would not have gone through with the cheating if it weren’t for your “help”, and, while this may or may not be true, since you can’t say with confidence whether it’s true or not I think it’s actually a pretty compelling argument.
Finally, I mentioned that even the ethical approach is potentially problematic. What I mean is, first of all, the argument that it is ethical is a bit tricky and I’m not 100% sure everyone will agree with it. Moreover, the sting might violate some policy or be disapproved of by the administration for reasons of public relations or other things not directly related to ethics. And second of all, from an educational point of view your role as an educator is not to set traps but to educate, while still maintaining a minimum level of integrity. Since the student has not yet actually copied the homework, if there is any way you can prevent the copying from happening without a sting, I think that would be vastly preferable. (For example, you could email the class and make it clear you are aware of the illicit use of the freelancer website, and warn about severe consequences for anyone caught using it, and maybe even announce a change in the assignment due to this violation, or something along those lines that could deter the cheater.)
Edit:
People are saying OP’s proposed sting does not qualify as “entrapment” as it is usually defined. Fine, I edited that word out, but stand behind the rest of what I wrote.
People are saying the student has already cheated (or “already chosen to cheat”) and some don’t seem to buy into my distinction between the offense already committed and the one that lies in the future. To drive home this distinction, consider this hypothetical scenario: OP doesn’t do the sting but lets affairs run their course. The student who advertised the freelancer job doesn’t end up hiring a freelancer (let’s say OP can see this on the website). A week later he walks into OP’s office and confessed that it he tried to hire a freelancer and asks for forgiveness. He swears he ended up actually doing the assignment, and even has evidence to prove this - dated emails exchanged with his older brother asking him some technical questions, log files on Dropbox with earlier drafts, etc.
My question is: should we punish the student in this situation with the same severity as in the scenario where he did submit the copied assignment, and later still confessed without any prompting? It seems to me that those who think he “already chose to cheat”, effectively branding himself forever as a cheater, should think that the exact same punishment is called for (except maybe that he should also get 0 on the assignment since he never did it, but otherwise the same). And if you don’t think the same punishment is appropriate, why doesn’t that then have implications about the ethics in OP’s question?
Sorry, but if taking their money in a scheme is wrong, then planning to give it back isn't going to save you.
Well, it’s better if the plan to return the money is documented, to avoid people getting the wrong idea. Maybe that’s what you meant.
There seems to be a lot of people in this thread working off an erroneous definition of entrapment. An illustrated guide is here: http://thecriminallawyer.tumblr.com/post/19810672629/12-i-was-entrapped , for it to be entrapment one of the elements that has to be present is overcoming resistance. ...
["Will you buy me drugs", "yes!" -> not entrapment. ] ...
["Will you buy me drugs", "No.", "but pleeeeease, you gotta or bad things will happen!", "..... OK" -> entrapment. ]
It's only entrapment if OP first convinced the student to buy the answers online.
Maybe you should talk to university lawyers first. If such a scheme results in a lawsuit, the university will certainly be named as a defendant.
It seems a bit weird to me to draw a distinction between the two acts, when the first consists solely of soliciting the second. The whole point of punishment is deterrence. I don't see how them not being able to complete the act without help affects the deterrence value of punishment. "or simply have a change of heart at the last minute" I don't see how that's relevant. How does giving them a solution keep them from changing their mind at the last minute.
@Acccumulation the distinction is perfectly logical. If you conspire to commit a crime, say by posting an ad trying to hire a hitman to kill someone, you would be guilty of (IANAL) something like conspiracy to commit murder. Only if a murder is committed will you be guilty of actually being an accessory to murder, which is a separate (and much worse) offense. The law wants people to change their mind at the last minute before doing bad things. (So should OP.) So it makes sense to have two separate concepts of wrongdoing, one for planning to do something bad and one for actually doing it.
@Acccumulation as for your second question, it’s perfectly possible that giving them a solution will keep them from changing their mind. E.g., maybe the solution you give them would be really good and when they see it they are tempted to use it. By comparison, if you hadn’t come along they would have hired a different freelancer who would do a shitty job, leading them to realize that the whole plan was misguided and they are better off doing the assignment themselves. All sorts of things can happen. If you had a role to play, however small, you’re in very problematic territory ethically.
I think this is the heart of the matter up to the point OP says paraphrased: 'assume they are going to cheat with the answer'.
@Murphy good point. I edited my answer to remove the reference to the word entrapment.
@Murphy What you describe seems to be the general legal definition of entrapment in American law. Other jurisdictions have different definitions (which may include the type of situation described in the question). Even if this is in the US, the legal definition may not matter, because OP is not a police and criminal charges are unlikely to be brought.
@DanRomik With regards to the second point in your edit: A slightly more analogous situation would be if the ad was posted, nobody answered it, the student did the work on their own, didn't remove the ad, and later someone discovered the ad. If the student confesses when they don't need to, that's an indicator that they've reevaluated the ethics of cheating and may be less likely to do it again. I suspect people would be more willing to show lenience in this case, compared to a situation where the student is caught attempting cheat (even if they fail to do so).
@Ray thanks, you have a point but in any case it was not meant to be a perfect analogy. Just something to draw attention to the distinction I was trying to make. Thanks for a thought-provoking discussion, and congrats on your highly voted answer. :-)
What about a constructive approach? Since you are already familiar with the website the student is using, why not show him the way to the solution instead of handing it to him in full?
I do not know about the specifics of your situation, but in my opinion you should try to positively influence the student rather than playing a prank.
(I'd still find it pretty funny, though.)
Sending him a modified solution can create new problems: what are you going to do if half of the class has a marked solution?
In my opinion, this approach would be ethically questionable at best, because you are actively helping the student to fail.
Not sure I agree; while "positively influencing the student" sounds nice, this is a student who is trying to buy answers, which is unfair to everyone else in the class. In any case, the question asks about legal/ethical implications of giving flagged solutions to identify cheaters, not for brainstorming possible alternative approaches.
+1 University is neither a competition, nor are academic teachers judges who have to hand out punishment at any attempted wrongdoing. Catch and caution him before he has actually cheated, and then teach him how to do it correctly, which is what you're payed for anyway.
"what are you going to do if half of the class has a marked solution?" Then half the class fails.
@Acccumulation More to the point, the teacher KNOWS THE EXTENT OF CHEATING in their class. That's an excellent reason to do it!
+1: I think discussing in private how one could catch the student and what one then do to them may be a good way for frustrated academic staff to blow off steam. But if you want the students to be open and honest towards you, you should also be open and honest. This seems to me calls rather for an educational part about freelancing websites in the next lecture/seminar and to a private professional talk to the student.
No, it is not unethical. It's the student's fault for using your marked solution when he or she shouldn't have. If the student is honest, nothing will happen; only dishonest students will have problems.
Here's something comparable: in 2013, journalist John Bohannon submitted intentionally fake papers to several open access journals. He did this as a test to see which are predatory (i.e. they don't perform peer review and just publish anything for money). You can read more about this at its Wikipedia article, as well as the results of the sting as published in Science. Note that although this operation generated loads of comments and criticisms, nobody faulted John Bohannon for acting unethically, including victims that failed the test. They know that if they were acting honestly, they would not have failed. Some of the "victims" who passed were even flattered:
Other publishers are glad to have dodged the bullet. "It is a relief to know that our system is working," says Paul Peters, chief strategy officer of Hindawi, an open-access publisher in Cairo. Hindawi is an enormous operation: a 1000-strong editorial staff handling more than 25,000 articles per year from 559 journals. When Hindawi began expanding into open-access publishing in 2004, Peters admits, "we looked amateurish." But since then, he says, "publication ethics" has been their mantra. Peer reviewers at one Hindawi journal, Chemotherapy Research and Practice, rejected my paper after identifying its glaring faults. An editor recommended I try another Hindawi journal, ISRN Oncology; it, too, rejected my submission.
Here is something else that's comparable: the Sokal affair, where a physicist submitted a nonsense paper to a postmodern journal and tricked it into publishing nonsense. This time, the journal's editors were aggrieved. But if you read that article, you'll see why:
... Later, after Sokal's self-exposure of his pseudoscientific hoax article in the journal Lingua Franca, the Social Text editors said in a published essay that they had requested editorial changes that Sokal refused to make, and had had concerns about the quality of the writing, stating "We requested him (a) to excise a good deal of the philosophical speculation and (b) to excise most of his footnotes". Nonetheless, despite subsequently designating the physicist as having been a "difficult, uncooperative author", and noting that such writers were "well known to journal editors", Social Text published the article in acknowledgment of the author's credentials in the May 1996 Spring/Summer "Science Wars" issue.
In essence, the editors of the journal were acting honestly in compliance with their stated purpose. If they wound up publishing nonsense anyway, it was because they didn't understand quantum physics. Since they're social scientists, nobody can fault them for that either.
Bottom line: as long as you set this up in such a way that only dishonest students will fail, you're not acting unethically.
I think your examples are quite different, actually. No money changes hands. There was no deception. There was no breach of a client relationship. I don't think the examples you give are unethical, but differ on the case in question here.
You’re assuming the premise that people fall neatly into two groups, “honest” and “dishonest”. The reality is more complex. If I leave my wallet on the sidewalk with $100 in it, someone might be tempted to pick it up, look inside and keep the money. Did that person wake up that morning wanting to commit theft? Probably not - they might have gone for years without committing a dishonest act. So you see, creating temptations for people to act dishonestly is problematic. It might be ok under some circumstances, but requires a more nuanced explanation than “only dishonest people will fail”.
@DanRomik I'd say that honesty is doing the right thing even when tempted - for the same reason, "she tempted me with her provocative dressing" isn't an excuse for rape.
@Buffy that's a good point. You might be interested: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/11100041/Revealed-identity-of-Fifi-the-stunning-wartime-spy.html Fifi was definitely paid to do what she did. Was it justified? My personal answer is yes, but I'll grant that some people will not approve of what happened.
@DanRomik If I find a wallet on the street and don't attempt to find the owner, that is dishonest, I have 'done wrong'. Considering if something is premeditated or is a 'crime of opportunity' is something best done in the sentencing phase of a trial - not an excuse given for bad behavior. Is it more understandable? Yes... but it should be called wrong when the wrong thing is done.
@J.ChrisCompton of course it’s wrong, I never said it wouldn’t be wrong. My point was that it may (or may not, depending on other complicated factors) be wrong for me to deliberately engineer a situation that would cause someone else to act dishonestly when they might not do so otherwise.
@DanRomik I see what you're saying now... thought you were headed someplace different - my fault. Thank you for clarifying!
I don't really understand the editors' objection in the Sokal case. It seems they're saying "He said we published his garbage because we were too dumb to know it was garbage. Of course we knew it was garbage!" OK, so you knowingly published garbage -- how is that better?
Hate to invoke yet another controversial case, but its worth noting that a self-styled "Sokal squared" incident of similar nature has led to the professor being placed into disciplinary proceedings for unauthorized experimentation (on the journal editors). So this is not nearly as uncontroversial as you might think. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Proceedings-Start-Against/245431
@aidanh010 thanks for the link, it's the first time I've heard of this case. Still, I think it proves the point: if well-meaning people acting honestly (as in the case of the duped editors) can fail the test, it can lead to controversy. In the case of the OP's question, no honest student is going to fail, so it probably won't lead to controversy.
@DavidRicherby I read their response as saying they're not sure the content is garbage, only the presentation is, and if we judge by content (as most people would try to do, especially if one has seen lots of papers by non-English-speaking authors ) then it might end up published anyway.
On a practical level, I think you should aim to prevent rather than punish as that works better in theory and in reality.
In this situation I would publicly show the sollicitation (anonymized) as well as put in a really too-low-priced bit (=no hint of profiteering) under your own name&affiliation so they know they're definitely caught. This way you only show one way you're being alert (and your other students may be posting requests on/in another forum/language you're not familiar with). [I would actually hint you check other language requests, if possible using the second not first most frequent further language amongst your students; for example the anonymized screenshot shows browser tabs of other-language forums being open (very natural/accidental looking, they're between URL and post!).]
Because I actually caught a student trying to consult during an exam notes hidden in the toilet cistern: After lots of blah (read, unpaid hours of work for a whole committee) the student got no punishment at all (I'm convinced because an overseas student in the UK is a well-paying client). Beyond showing the whole class there's nothing to lose in attempting to cheat (further increasing your guard-dog duties you never wanted), even if eventually punished the delay between crime and punishment makes it ineffective as a deterrent; at best warns them to be more clever. The assertion in other answers that the student has already broken the rules doesn't really hold: The dean ruled that even though the student demonstrably hid the notes before and re-opened the cistern during the exam, since I'd taken away the notes the student hadn't benefitted so no actual unfair benefit occurred and the exam results stand; if anything, they were disadvantaged the second exam due to the stress of knowing they're discovered.
This is the reality in academia: The student has spent 5min posting a request online, maybe wanting to go through with it maybe not (maybe testing you're aware or not?); now a whole bunch of academics with better things to do are spending many hours on this useless non-academic (policing?) task, with a very small probability of effective punishment/deterrent at the end.
Students are already wise to the fact that you just take known-good essays, run it 2--3 turns of GoogleTranslate, and edit it to be grammatical again (with the original for meaning) and all TurnItIn/fraud-checking software will at best suggest it's suspect.
I wouldn't do it.
You're putting that answer out there and it may get used or transmitted to others. So you are spreading both the right answer (to cheaters, perhaps not limited to one student) and spreading a flaw (even if the flaw is just fluff in the middle...it is still flawed thinking).
Don't think the risk/reward is worth it. It's not that I'm sympathetic to cheaters or endorse liberal student's rights (the opposite). But don't stick your hand into a bee's nest. You don't know how this little drama will progress...
An alternate approach: Just tell the class that you found the posting. Inform the class that you thought about stinging and have decided not to do it (for now). And that use of such resources is cheating and if ever discovered will result in course failure and school punishment (which can include expulsion).
P.s. I know I will get mucho grief for this, but I strongly urge you to consider using in class exams versus projects or turned in homework. Obviously there are some design courses where this is not feasible. But I think exams are falsely deprecated. Students learn a lot in preparing for exams, taking them, and then seeing the corrections. Project work tends to be loved by college teachers since it allows more complex material to be dealt with and because it mimics research they do (or did when grad students). But it is not necessarily as pedagogically helpful in building basic toolkits. (Consider R. Feynman spoke glowingly dedades later of the benefits of speed algebra!) Also, it is definitely more prone to outright or borderline cheating.
One issue I see here, that I haven't seen addressed in the other answers, is that even if you were to inform the proper channels, answer the bid and deliver a "rigged" solution, the student might a) still not use it, or b) modify it before submitting. I would imagine a) as a simple case of cold feet, the developer would still get paid, but the student might have a change of heart in the last minute. b) is more interesting, as the student might use just the general idea, a part of the solution, or even feel that it is too advanced and attempt to strip it down by introducing deliberate flaws in order to avoid suspicion that it is not their own work (assuming still that there is no reason for the student to believe that there is anything wrong with the guy who did the work).
The first point is, there is a plausible scenario in which you can't identify the student, but have done their job for them and even gotten paid (I assume that the money wouldn't be kept, but it is the transaction that matters).
The second point is, that in this case, you miss the opportunity to educate. If the student isn't identified, they might try again. Will you do the new assignment again and hoping that this time it leads to student? Also, other students are not deterred from acting similarly, especially after the word gets out that someone put the homework assignment on some webpage and got it done by a freelancer. You can't come into class and tell that you found the ad and prepared a sting operation by doing someone's homework, but the offender eluded it somehow, can you?
So, for the question about ethics, while the initial motive to catch someone red handed is in my opinion ethical, the result in case of failure is unethical (or "more unethical"). If you fail, you did the homework on behalf of a student (which is worse than if someone else did it), you got money for it (whatever you do with it, the student still paid to get the work done, and it got done without consequences by none other than you, that angle matters in my mind), and you didn't deter similar behavior in the future, neither of the offending student nor of the rest of the class. Which side outweighs the other ethically can be debated, but I think it comes at a great risk, and would recommend against it.
Someone might ask: "Should I then do nothing and let them cheat???". If such a sting operation were the only resort, I would seriously consider myself outplayed and do nothing rather than risk being part of it. I would of course keep a lookout when the homework is handed in. I would also proactively tailor the homework so that it depends heavily on the coursework and hope that an outside expert would either have to invest a non-trivial amount of time to familiarize himself with the material (which might be infeasible in terms of cost, however the pay arrangement) or have his solution stand out among the other students'.
As a final thought, consider that if you don't answer their ad, no one else might.
As long as it is completely unambiguous that the student intends to cheat, I do not think it would be unethical to "entrap" them. The important principle is that, in your capacity as the "freelancer" providing the "flagged solution", you do not at any point encourage or incite the student to cheat.
When the student is caught, he/she will probably claim that he/she only wanted some guidance, not the solution, and that the "freelancer" misinterpreted his/her wishes. To ensure that you cannot be accused of inciting misconduct, it is important that the written evidence (electronic-mail correspondence is admissible as evidence in a court of law) demonstrates beyond doubt that, after having made a good faith effort to assist the student to an extent that would not constitute cheating, the student insisted, on his/her own initiative, upon having the complete solution.
What would OP gain from failing the student, other than the right to brag in future classes? For the student on the other hand, failing or being removed from the class could have way more severe negative consequences.
And you take their money. Don't neglect that part.
@JonasSchwarz, surely the question is what the entire university loses from not failing the student. If the consequences of being caught cheating are not worse than the consequences of not doing the work at all, the "rational" thing to do is to cheat when you fear not being able to submit the work.
The usual ethics-is-complex caveat aside: I can't see how this is could be completely free of unethical behaviour. At a very simple level, you are potentially harming this student. By giving them an answer they are more likely to use it, which is bad for everyone. You could argue this is not much more likely but you'd have to be pretty certain and I don't see how you could be.
On the 'would they follow through' side, while legal and moral are not the same thing, the universality of the general principle of: 'testing the water is not the same as taking the plunge' in law is there for a reason. As is the less discussed (and maybe less universal): 'if you make it easy/tempting for someone it is less of a crime'. (I expect push back on this but its quite common and I think reasonable.)
There's more nuanced things to consider too.
Like:
Is it ethical for you to be hunting down this sort of behaviour? Is a separate question to: Is the hunting itself ok?
You are close to the student and have a position of power. Questions of fairness etc are hard to remove.
Are you sure your proof will hold?
Assume they turn in this solution. Now you have to proof, they hired you as freelancer and they can claim, that they maybe collaborated with someone who had a really nice solution without knowing of the freelancer.
In the worst case, they can insist on "I do not know, why others used zyjkbk as variable name as well and I do not care if you cannot proof anything but this variable name".
So if you want to proof this misconduct, you better catch them e.g. by using his real name on the website, not by using marked solutions.
This seems to be based on a misunderstanding of what sort of proof is necessary in cases of academic dishonesty.
I think that the legality of doing this would be in question in a lot of places. I doubt that the police could do a similar thing (in the US) without first obtaining a court order, for example.
I think the ethics of it might also be questionable, but I think a discussion with an ethicist might be in order. The reason for the requirement for a court order, by the way, is to get an independent, non interested, opinion as to the propriety, as well as the legality.
You made the right decision IMO to avoid doing this and to be cautious about it.
However, if students are informed specifically or generally that such sites are monitored it might at least cut down on the practice. Of course it would be more useful if such assignments could be marked on those sites when they appear.
Ultimately, of course, while we want to "catch a thief" it is better all around if we can prevent the theft in the first place.
Based on the comments here let me add that I haven't claimed that the activity is definitely illegal anywhere, only that it might be. Moreover, my suggestions to avoid this action is to save people from potential grief that they might suffer by taking an action that "seems fair, but is foul". I try not to recommend risky behavior and generally caution people against it. Your desires may differ, of course.
What would be illegal?
@AzorAhai, I would think fraud might be charged as someone need to misrepresent their intentions and role. Possibly others. I'm not a lawyer, but I'd certainly want legal as well as ethical advice on such a scheme. I think that a university that was known for entrapping students in this way would quickly get a bad reputation, though that isn't a legal issue.
Hard to see how this is fraud or at all questionably legal. One isn't getting money for the solution. And I'm not sure why you think that police would need a court order to do something similar. There are a lot of misconceptions about entrapment but the actual circumstances where it legally constitutes entrapment are extremely narrow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment#United_States .
@JoshuaZ, I didn't mean to imply that this would be legal entrapment as it isn't the police doing it and a crime isn't being charged. I used that to point out how such things are generally viewed. Fraud doesn't necessarily require "getting money". You can defraud people in other ways.
To me the idea that this might be illegal looks quite far-fetched. "I doubt the police could do a similar thing..." The police only investigate things that are potentially illegal, and cheating on your homework is not illegal.
@PeteL.Clark. It was an analogy. Police won't investigate cheating, but they might investigate fraud. If you represent yourself to a student in a fraudulent way, you may be at risk. A student with a lawyer parent might decide to take you down. I only advise caution. It may be illegal and it may be unethical.
If someone posted a solution on MathOverflow on a new account, and then they copy-and-pasted it into their HW, in what manner has the person on the new account committed fraud?
Hmmm. Actually, money is involved. The student who is "caught" has paid for the phony answer.
@AzorAhai, I don't see how your latest comment is related to this at all. It is the providing of the phony answer (for money) with the intent to "out" the student that is the (potential) fraud.
The question clearly asks about providing a correct solution, not a phony one.
@AzorAhai, a meaningless distinction here. The "solution" is intended to be "caught". It doesn't matter whether it is correct or not. I used "phony" only in the sense that the intent of providing it is not to help the "client" but only to catch him/her.
@Buffy I'm getting the sense you're speculating about fraud. I don't know much about what defines fraud, so I asked you. When you have an actual legal explanation of what would be illegal, please share it with us.
@AzorAhai, I'm not a lawyer, and yes, I'm speculating. My answer doesn't claim that it is necessarily illegal, and likely won't be some places. However, if you contract with me for something and pay me to provide it, but I use what I give you to cause you harm - even if you deserve it - then I worry that I have committed a transgression and may have crossed a legal boundary as well as (potentially) an ethical one. I will have misrepresented my intentions and, while you are my "client", I'm acting against your interests.
Things are not legal or illegal by analogy. Speculating that the legality of an action "would be in question in a lot of places" without any justification or legal expertise is, in my opinion, unhelpful.
Actually, this whole comment thread makes me wonder why freelancer sites don't impose a standard contract on the providers that prevents them from acting against clients in any way.
I'm not a lawyer, but agents of the government have to follow a stricter line then private citizens as to what is legal and what is illegal. If this is a state supported school, issues of dishonesty and entrapment may cross a line that the same behavior in a private school would not.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.461418 | 2019-01-30T15:19:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/124037",
"authors": [
"Acccumulation",
"Aidan",
"Allure",
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"Buffy",
"Charles E. Grant",
"Dan Romik",
"David Richerby",
"DonQuiKong",
"J. Chris Compton",
"Jonas Schwarz",
"JoshuaZ",
"Karl",
"Murphy",
"Muzer",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Peter Taylor",
"Ray",
"Shawn V. Wilson",
"Tobias Kildetoft",
"UKMonkey",
"Wrzlprmft",
"cag51",
"cbeleites",
"drjpizzle",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103746",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103853",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12592",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16078",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22995",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39049",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/464",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62225",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63679",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64207",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/67137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80498",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80651",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80748",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85812",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97038",
"jkej",
"user71659"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
866 | Getting the best out of a book-reading exercise
A doctorate involves plumbing the depths of a problem and often this involves a lot of knowledge breadth-wise in related areas. Though the latter is provided by coursework, education about a precise "tool" that a doctorate may need during solving his problem is unlikely to have been provided by the courses. Often the PhD may run into huge tomes of material which he has been introduced to by Wikipedia. Intuitively he/she may feel that somewhere in those volumes lies a theorem or an idea which can provide vital keys to solving his own problem. So I come to my questions:
What should a student do to get the best out of a book-reading exercise? The question in turn assumes the student has arrived by some means at the best book for serving his purpose.
There is a trade-off involved in reading books tangential to your field: you may spend a lot of time groping in the dark looking for a bounty which may never be there. How does one gauge the potential applicability of a book to his work? When does a student decide to pull the plug on such an effort?
Related Question: Skimming through a paper
First, I would like to comment on some of your sentences. Then I will answer to your 2 questions.
Often the PhD may run into huge tomes of material which he has been introduced to by Wikipedia: I am not sure that I understand this sentence well. Are you using Wikipedia for bootstrapping and then proceed from page to page in wikipedia, hoping to find something useful, or do you use another source of idea, but jump to wikipedia to understand in a faster way the entities/concepts you find in the first place ? BTW, in most cases I am not sure Wikipedia is something we should use at the research level. The quality is clearly increasing, but this is far from perfect, and some essential intuitions are missing sometimes (almost always ?).
Intuitively he/she may feel that somewhere in those volumes lies a theorem or an idea which can provide vital keys to solving his own problem. This sentence makes me think that you maybe focus too much on a specific problem.
Now, my answers :
When I read a paper or a book, I proceed the same way: First I quickly go through the whole thing (for a book, the whole thing is generally a chapter). Then I try to understand the key intuitions and results. At that point I don't try to understand how they are proven. Then I switch to other things. When I am thinking of a problem, or when I am on other concepts, sometimes a flash occurs and I have the intuition that something I have read can be useful, then I go back to the paper/book and try to totally understand the result. Here, this means more or less homework like in the old days ;)
Reading tangential materials is a necessity. I proceed as stated above, and to make sure that I will not spend all my time on this, I decided to always spend the same amount of time reading on other fields. For me this is roughly 1 day a week, which is 1/3 to 1/2 of the time I can use for research.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.464987 | 2012-03-24T20:00:35 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/866",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
13293 | Pure vs Applied maths, and combinatorics, in American universities
I'm in my last year of an undergraduate degree in pure maths, doing my thesis on probabilistic combinatorics. In Australia (at least at my university), Hungarian-style combinatorics is classified as "pure".
I'm currently thinking about PhDs and where to apply. One thing that I've noticed is that combinatorics is often classified under "applied maths" (for example, this is the case at MIT).
One important reason I'd consider pursuing a PhD at an American university is for the coursework component -- I'd like to broadly improve my foundational understanding of mathematics, and I like the possibility of changing my area of focus after deeper exposure to different areas of mathematics. However, I have comparatively little interest in applied mathematics coursework (other than combinatorics, of course).
I have a submitted paper in combinatorics, my undergraduate thesis will be in combinatorics, and by far my strongest reference will be from a combinatorialist. Other than my supervisor, my strongest potential references would come from areas that everyone seems to agree are "pure". The higher-level classes in my transcript will also be almost entirely "pure".
For American universities which have both a pure and an applied math program, which one does one typically choose to study combinatorics? Is it flexible? With a cursory search, I wasn't able to find a university quite so explicit about it as MIT.
For universities that classify combinatorics as "applied":
Given my situation, would my application be stronger to pure or applied maths?
Can one do a PhD in pure mathematics with the (tentative) intention for the research component to actually be "applied" (combinatorics)?
Can one do a PhD in applied mathematics but actually take mostly pure coursework?
My suggestion is to find the people whose research area is combinatorics, then the schools they are at.
As in answers and comments... "combinatorics" is not an explanatory label, most of the time. Often, it is a reasonable label only in the sense that all matter seems to be made of bosons and fermions... but without explanation? To my mind, much of the best "combinatorics" is really better described by other labels... hence, you may fail to find such work under the label "combinatorics".
If you come here for "general advice", I am afraid you'll be disappointed.
You should choose based on the people there. For each school you apply to, look through both the applied and pure departments and see where the mathematicians who work in combinatorics fit in. Most large research universities will list their faculty by research interest, or have dedicated research group webpages. For example, based on this page you probably do not want to apply to Princeton's pure math program.
Note that many schools do not, at least on the graduate admission level, differentiate so strictly about going into applied versus pure mathematics.
(For choosing the school, since you already have research experience, you should look up articles which you find interesting and find out where those authors currently reside.)
It really depends on the school. If a school has no combinatorialist in its pure maths department, and you apply there with an intention of studying combinatorics, your chance of admission is practically 0. Similarly in reverse if all the combinatorics is done in the pure maths department for the school you are applying to.
There is no "one size fits all" solution.
This again depends on the school. Some schools allow it, some schools don't. In many departments it is expected that you find an advisor from within the department and do your dissertation research on a subject that your advisor is interested in and/or an expert on. In other departments more leeway are given to students interested in more interdisciplinary subjects to be jointly advised by two advisors (possibly from different departments with different expertise). But remember, if you are going for a PhD you will need to find an advisor in any case. Shoehorning yourself into a situation where it maybe difficult to find a professor in your own department who is willing to advise you is, in my view, generally not recommended.
This again depends on the individual policies for the schools. Some departments have very strict requirements on what the students must learn for their comprehensive exams; some, not so much. Most schools with graduate programs have very clearly written information on their websites about what is expected in their degree plans. For example, here's Harvard's version for the Applied Maths degree, though it seems they are a little bit short on the exact details.
The only "general advice" I can give is this:
Don't apply to graduate schools blindly, especially since you have a confirmed research interest. Do your homework and find the experts with whom you would like to study, and apply to study with them. Write to them in advance to confirm that they are interested in taking on students, and possibly solicit advice about other possible individuals if they are not.
A good research school may not be strong in the field of research you want to do. Always, always check before applying.
This is a fantastic answer, thank you for taking the time. It sounds like I'm going to be doing some research and email-sending for each institution.
I think you are overgeneralizing from an example here; the placement of combinatorics in applied math at MIT is due to ancient historical department politics, and regarded as an amusing quirk by those of us educated at other schools. While I completely agree with Willie's answer that you should carefully research schools you want to attend, at most schools combinatorics is regarded as a perfectly fine branch of pure mathematics. If you want to do the pure math coursework, and you see yourself as wanting to do pure mathematics, then probably you should just apply for the pure math programs at places with some strong combinatorialists (Berkeley, Penn, Davis, San Diego, Michigan, Minnesota, etc.)
That's definitely reassuring. That short list is invaluable, thank you so much!
Perhaps my generalization is understandable given that apart from Berkeley and MIT (and CMU, which seems to have an applied-focused maths faculty), all the "top" american universities (up to rank about 20 on the QS rankings) have almost no combinatorialists in their maths faculties. I had assumed they were hidden away in applied, stats or CS.
@Matt That's an extremely restrictive criterion, and false anyways. Berkeley has several excellent combinatorialists listed in the algebra research group. Anyways, you'd be better off looking at a list like: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-schools/discrete-mathematics-rankings The US News rankings are somewhat bullshit, but at least are a starting place.
@Matt Ah, sorry, I hadn't read the "aside from Berkeley" part of your comment (though Michigan and Georgia Tech are in the top 20 of the QS list for math, and they have easily findable combinatorialists). Anyways, the point stands that top 20 in the world is not a very good criterion. Minnesota, UIUC, UCSD and Rutgers are all excellent graduate programs (top 25 in the US according the US News list) with multiple combinatorialists in their pure math faculty, and which also have the breadth to do plenty of other things if your interests change.
Thanks for the US news list! That's very helpful. I wasn't meaning to say I'm only interested in a top 20 school, but not being American I had no other way to know what schools exist and are reputable (i meant US unis in the top 20, not top 20 US unis, sorry). My supervisor is English and knows a lot more about universities there. It turns out I was wrong about that anyway, after seeing UCLA so high on the US news list I took a closer look and there are definitely combinatorialists there, though they're not listed under a research group for some reason.
Like Ben Websiter said, at times excellent combinatorialists will list something other than combinatorics as their research interest (algebra, number theory, harmonic analysis and functional analysis comes to mind). Why not ask your supervisor about a list of people whom you should approach?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.465278 | 2013-10-09T07:11:07 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13293",
"authors": [
"Ben Webster",
"Matt",
"Nobody",
"Rover Eye",
"Willie Wong",
"WombatCombat",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33988",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33995",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34005",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6282",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett",
"user33995"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
9884 | Curriculum Vitae in application for PhD
I have contacted a professor (in Europe) informally and asked for a PhD position. She answered in positive manner and asked for a CV.
What should I include?
Do people in academia care about the usual 2-page restriction?
Generally I would say No, people do not put restrictions on CVs unless specifically asking for it.
In a case such as the one you decribe you should send a complete CV that lists everything that can be meriting for the position you will apply for. The following would be of interest:
A brief description of your drive and interest to pursue a PhD
Course work includig grades
Scientific/equivalent experience is a given of course.
Any publications and scientific/equivalent reports you have written. If you have some significant report/thesis that you have written during your education, you can list that as well. I would say that any report longer than, say, 10 pages of text might be useful to list. In such cases you should perhaps add inwhat context (Course) the text was written. In the end what a person looking for a PhD position will be looking for is someone who can successfully complete work and write it up in written form.
Scientific/equivalent presentations in a public context, open department seminar, scientific meeting etc.
Any academic work experience such as working inlabs etc.
General work experience. This can be listed to highlght work experience of any kind. This shows how active you are.
Anything else that you think will be meriting.
If you have written a paper (thesis) of some sort, provide a copy. Only one, the most important though. If you do not have one that is fine, no one would expect you to have written much.
Despite the length of the list try to make it brief and clear so that it can be assessed with ease. ry to find a good layout that make sthe structure easy to see.
The only thing I can think that's missing from Peter's list is references. If you have one or two well-placed people who are willing to give a reference for you, listing them here and providing (email) contact information would be a good idea.
@Bill Good point, I missed that. +1
Items (1) and (2) on your list are not parts of an academic CV. They accompany the CV as part of an application as a (1) statement of purpose or cover letter and (2) a transcript (the latter if needed), but are not normally listed in a CV. Degrees, overall averages, and honors should be mentioned, but "drive and interest" and individual courses are not part of the scope of a CV.
@aeismail You are right in that for you and me this would not be included but in the case of the OP I think it would be useful to include since we are dealing with a candidate looking for a PhD position. I know I would like that information. It also seems you picture all CVs having to sport the same content, I do not fully agree on that notion. A CV will be tailored in detail to suit transient needs.
A CV is customizable, but particularly for many countries in Europe, it does not include a "statement of purpose"! One must include this, but as I said, it goes in the cover letter or a separate statement of purpose that gets submitted with the CV. A list of courses would be considered part of the "certifications" that are submitted as part of the hiring process.
A good answer but it assumes the op is in science. I would suggest a less-science-specific answer as your answer is quite generalizable (and the op does not mention being in a science-related field).
@earthling Good point.
@aeismail Good points. If I read your comment correctly does that mean that the culture in a particular country or field is so strong that any deviation from a norm is unthinkable?
It's not unthinkable, but it's definitely inadvisable. The further afield you go, the more likely you're going to have an adverse reaction on the part of someone reviewing your applications!
I would be surprised if a PhD applicant really needed a CV that was longer than 2 pages. So while not a rule, it is probably a reasonable guideline.
Someone else had mentioned this on a related question here: the words "curriculum vitae" are taken from the Latin for "course of my life". So there's not much point in a page restriction :), unlike a corporate resume, which is often required to be one page or one sheet.
As for what you should put in it, Peter's answer is very comprehensive.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.466218 | 2013-05-09T16:28:58 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9884",
"authors": [
"John Harbord",
"Matthew Belonio",
"Peter Jansson",
"StrongBad",
"aeismail",
"bill s",
"earthling",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24357",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24358",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24359",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24360",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24362",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6308",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"jason c. kay",
"kkron",
"letranger"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
5702 | Are there guidelines for amount and content of text in figure captions for theses?
In writing my thesis in geosciences I have a number of figures with a fair amount of text content. Is there some limit I should adhere to -- say for example max 5 lines -- before I should just write 'refer to text'?
A related question is where citations should go, especially in the case of several needed for one figure (e.g. a plot of n sets of data from n different sources). Again, is there some point where I should say refer to text for citations?
Usually, these things are specified in the style guide for the thesis at your institution. If not, then you can probably do whatever you like.
No mention of it in our handbook, so I guess I'll make it up as I go along :)
The desire for a long caption is often an indicator of an overly complex figure.
I would imagine this may vary from field to field, but in the biological sciences the caption text in journal publications is often verbose to the point of absurdity. That being said, I would simply use common sense; If the description takes more than a paragraph, you should definitely "refer to text". Generally speaking, the caption is simply a textual guide as to how to read the plot, with (maybe) a sentence drawing the reader's attention to a particular feature of the plot. It should mostly describe the plot, and only sparingly discuss it.
The only guidance I've ever been given on figures is that a reader should be able to understand them in isolation from the text. Ideally to me the caption should capture the essence of the figure.
+1 for "only sparingly discuss it". The caption needs to help readers understand your data, not your conclusions. The following are all fine things to include in a caption: a brief description of how the data were collected and/or processed, why you chose a logarithmic scale instead of a linear one, the difference between open and closed symbols, why there is a big circle around the rat's head in picture 4, etc. Any straying into the realm of interpretation belongs in the body, not in the caption.
An expert in the field should be able to understand most of the content of the figure from the figure and caption alone. The caption should be long enough to admit this, but no longer. If your captions seem to need to be pages long, then you need to work on making your figure adhere better to standards in the field or to be intuitively clearer.
If you run out of time to make it comprehensible, keep the caption comfortably smaller than the figure itself; having a tiny figure with a huge block of text just looks wrong. It takes a long time to make really clear figures, but you can at least get the superficial style right quickly enough.
+1 for the comment about time. Making well-designed figures, with high information content per square inch but simultaneously readily understandable, requires a lot of work. From my experience in neurobiology, it often takes longer to prepare the figures than the text of the manuscript.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.466735 | 2012-12-13T00:34:35 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5702",
"authors": [
"Ben Norris",
"StrongBad",
"Suresh",
"Tiel Wir",
"Viral",
"a different ben",
"alu",
"anonymous neuroscientist",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1030",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14775",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14776",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14777",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14823",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/924",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"schr"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
16758 | Which role should other graduate students serve in a PhD defense?
In some countries and at certain universities, graduate students are advisory members of the committee during the PhD defense. In other countries like the Netherlands, a PhD defense takes place in public and everyone might ask questions at the end. Therefore, I would like to know:
How should another graduate student serve his/her role as an advisory member of the PhD committee?
What kind of questions should one ask in a public PhD defense?
How should he/she prepare for the defense (other than obviously reading the dissertation)?
I recall hearing that the Netherlands is rather different from many North American schools in that they have both a private and a public Ph.D defense, and the public defense is more ceremonial than scientific - all of the "hard judgements" are done in the private defense. This may or may not have an effect on the answers.
The first thing I would do is to ask the committee chair what are my rights and responsibilities as an advisory member. In short, what is it expected from me. I guess I would be expected to ask questions but I will not participate on the final decision of the defence.
Participation in a PhD defence committee seems to me as a good opportunity to learn critical thinking about research. The thinking every researcher should apply on his/her own work. Therefore, as a preparation I would recommend:
(as you mentioned) Carefully read the dissertation and
if you find something which is not clear to you even after several readings, ask about it
look at some of the references you find interesting and try to ask yourself: "Is this reference appropriate here? Why?"
in case some formulas or computations are present, you can try to reach the same result as the PhD candidate
if you are interested in methodology you can ask the
candidate why he/she used that particular method
to do more, you can try to find another works on the same topic, read them and compare them with the dissertation as it is always good for discussion to have more information about the topic
In case of public PhD defence, the audience can be very broad from family members who do not know what is the research about to an expert from another department who came to rise his/her ego by asking non-answerable questions. Here, the question depends on the person who is asking. No background knowledge is expected here and one should not feel restricted by the circumstances.
My personal opinion is that one can ask really about anything as far as his/her intentions are good. If the question is irrelevant the PhD candidate or one of the committee should kindly explain why.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.467039 | 2014-02-10T11:02:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16758",
"authors": [
"Daisy",
"Irwin",
"Jim",
"Joe Leiman",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45158",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45159",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45160",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45184",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5944",
"user45184"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
15906 | Should referencing critical comments on papers that have been referenced be obligatory?
Say a paper submitted for publication in a journal by Prof. Bertie Wooster references a paper by Dr Augustus Fink-Nottle, but that paper was the subject of a critical peer-reviewed comment by Prof. Roderick Spode. Should I insist as a reviewer that Prof. Spode's paper should also be referenced and the criticism at least mentioned, even if I personally do not agree with Prof. Spode's point of view?
My intuition is that the reader of a paper should reasonably expect to be made aware of any element on which Prof. Woosters work is based that has been seriously called into question, so that he is able to form an opinion on the matter. Am I being unreasonable in this expectation?
Why are you asking? (E.g.: you are reviewing a paper as opposed to you are writing a paper)
neither in this case, but I am interested in the general principle, so I don't want to get into specifics as that might influence the answers. As it happens I have written a handful of comments papers, and it is interesting to see when they get cited alongside the original and when they don't.
This depends on why you reference the paper. If you reference it because of the details that were later commented on, there is definitely reason to also mention the disagreement. I would consider that a basic aspect of any referencing of relevant literature. If, on the other hand the comments by Spode have later been shown to be wrong (Jeeves, 2008) or irrelevant the "historic" discussion has little relevance.
So I think your sense is correct. But, the necessity to reference both depends on the reason for referencing. The two are not eternally linked for every aspect of the original paper, only the parts where opinions differ and from which the discussion has arisen.
+1 Good point about the reason for the referencing. The real problem is that rather than being shown to be wrong by Jeeves (definitive on most things, but notoriously hidebound and reactionary on the subject of evening wear), there is instead a rejoinder from Fink-Nottle, that is rather unsatisfactory, leaving either side able to claim the other having been shown to be wrong. Thanks for your answers to both of todays questions!
I basically agree with Peter Jansson's answer. But I'm wondering:
It's clear the follow-up papers need to be cited if they are important for the topic at hand. In that case, I'd not only reference them but sum them in a sentence or so.
If they are not immediately relevant, I'd still mention them, like
... paper [Fink-Nottle] and the follow-up discussion [Spode, Fink-Nottle2]
or, even shorter
... paper [Fink-Nottle, Spode, Fink-Nottle2]
IMHO this is very low effort, and it is being nice to readers who want to look into the first Fink-Nottle paper (possibly because its topic is closer to what they are looking for than the major part of the present paper).
+1 For myself, if it is an important matter I would take the first option, if it was not an important matter I would use the shorter method. If someone is interested enough to go and read Fink-Nottle1, they are probably going to want to be aware of Spode and Fink-Nottle2 as well, it might be an important issue for their research.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.467281 | 2014-01-17T19:46:19 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15906",
"authors": [
"Adam White",
"Dikran Marsupial",
"EnglishTeacherEric",
"Errico Malatesta",
"Insane",
"NextThursday",
"Umar Iqbal",
"cbeleites",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2827",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41614",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41615",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41616",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41617",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41621",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41625",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41679",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"l7ll7"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
14882 | Soliciting pre-submission manuscript comments from people who could later be peer reviewers
Before submitting a manuscript to a journal, it is fairly common at least in my field (psychology) to circulate the manuscript in a limited way to a small number of people who are experts in the area and/or who would be willing and able to provide useful comments, for the purpose of soliciting their feedback and suggestions for improving the manuscript before submitting it for formal peer review.
However it seems that this could lead to a tricky situation if the editor of the journal ends up asking some of those same people who provided feedback to serve as reviewers for the paper, since they will have already read the paper and in a sense "reviewed" it one time already.
So I have two questions about this:
From the perspective of a person who has been asked by the authors to provide comments, and then later asked by a journal editor to review that same paper for publication: what is your policy, or your perception of the common policy, for what do to here? Do you decline to review the paper because you've already seen it? Do you agree to review the paper, but perhaps provide many of the same comments verbatim as before (at least for the parts of the paper that were not changed), and perhaps let the editor know that you've read it before? Or do you see your prior reading of the paper as totally irrelevant and just approach the review fresh and as normal?
From the strategic perspective of the authors of the paper, is it better to ask for comments from people who you know are likely to be asked later to review the paper? Or is it better to avoid sending the paper to these people, and instead send it to people who are not as likely to be asked to review the paper but could still provide useful feedback?
I feel this question implies authors are planning on not disclosing of contributors (e.g. who provided significant suggestions) in their acknowledgments section. That would sustain a 'strategy' as suggested in point 2 where the authors could invite someone who's likely to be chosen as a reviewer later, so as to have the paper in shape for a positive review by a same person without anyone else realising. That'd sound like gaming the peer review to me, see my answer below.
There are two aspects to this question: what should happen and what actually happens. Soliciting comments on a manuscript is of course perfectly fine and a useful endeavour. As you state problems may arise if persons commenting on the manuscript is asked to review it. Such a person should simply decline to review the paper when requested. It is thus possible that such a person reviews the paper anyway but then the problem is between the reviewer and the editor, that is beyond your reach. What you can do to simplify for an editor is to list persons who have commented on the manuscript. It will then be up to the editor to decide what becomes a breach of objectivity.
If your topic is narrow enough that the number of possible reviewers are limited, you need to consider if you "use up" potential reviewers in the process. Again, I think being open about who has commented on the paper in your correspondence should allow the editor to find good reviewers. Just because you avoid soliciting someone's opinion does not mean the editor will ask that person for a review so assessing such effects is difficult and generalized answers of little use. Knowing the field and potential problems is the only way to assess pros and cons.
+1 for "being open about who has commented on the paper in your correspondence [with the editor]". Actually, it would be better to write their names directly in the paper, in a final Acknowledgments section.
I am a bit unclear as to why "Such a person should simply decline to review the paper when requested." Could you elaborate?
I see no problem with refereeing a paper after I've commented on it to the author. I would tell the author what (if anything) I think would improve the paper, and I would tell the editor whether I think it's appropriate for the particular journal and if so then what (if anything) would improve the paper. There have been cases where an editor asked me to referee a paper and wrote, in his cover message, that he knew (because of acknowledgements) that I'd already read the paper, so it should be easy for me to referee.
Exactly. I interpret from this question as implying that authors who are not acknowledging contributions properly might think of using this as a 'strategy' to receive a positive review. Sounds like a peer review double dip to me.
The problem is that it may be a breach of anonomity, since the peer review will probably be very similar to the one you sent to the author.
In my humble opinion, if there are no conflicts of interest (same university or funding), the referee should inform the editor that is already in contact with the author and let him choose.
In any case, consider that many journals require authors to indicate qualified referees and the scientific community is a forum for discussion.
In conclusion, be transparent, fair and honest, but do not make choices instead of the publisher.
The job of a reviewer is mainly to advise the editor on what to do with a manuscript. From the point of view of an editor, picking someone who has already read the manuscript will shorten turnaround (which is a big thing in some fields) because they need less additional time to read the paper and are likely competent to do so. Since editors rely on this advice, editors should be able to trust referees. They may consider it more likely that people in the acknowledgment section are close to the authors and potentially biased, but this is less of an issue if we talk about renowned people in the field who value their reputation highly and that are not obviously personally connected to the author.
A potentially serious problem is that anonymity is harder to keep, since raising the same points that have been raised before might, if these points are very specific or unique, make it clear who the referee is. This is the only reason why I might decline refereeing a paper I've commented on before.
I think this is a trivial situation and should involve no conflicts given everyone is being honest, e.g. acknowledging contributions.
My answers:
Normally as a reviewer I will decline to review while stating I have already evaluated the manuscript before. While directing the editor to read the acknowledgments section, which should s/he ought to have done prior to choosing reviewers. Depending on the case I may accept but I will disclose of my name and of the fact that I had discussed the paper before with the authors, as ought to had been disclosed of in the acknowledgments section.
As an author I will invite some colleague to give opinions, acknowledge his/her contribution, and will not suggest this person as a reviewer. I assume the editor will actually read the manuscript and heed the acknowledgments section prior to choosing reviewers, and trust whoever takes it up to do their job correctly.
In some fields the acknowledgement section is not in the manuscript sent for review, but is only added in camera-ready, to preserve double-blind review.
@justhalf You're right ! I don't know how this works in Psychology, and actually not quite how other colleagues do it in my field. I include acknowledgments in my submitted manuscripts, also for the sake of transparency.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.467597 | 2013-12-18T06:54:46 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14882",
"authors": [
"Erel Segal-Halevi",
"Federico Poloni",
"RoughHawkbit",
"Scientist",
"Shraddha Puntambekar",
"Spammer",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38654",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38655",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38656",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38660",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38661",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38663",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/66782",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/787",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"ilucm",
"justhalf",
"nstenz",
"yin du le"
],
"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
} |
103198 | Benefits of being a guest editor of a journal?
In recent months, I've begun receiving invitations to serve as a "guest editor" for various journals from publishers I've worked with in the past that I believe are reputable.
I recognize that there's significant workload for such an issue and very little, if any, compensation, but I'm wondering what the benefits are for tenure-track faculty to serve in such a capacity. Is it worth the investment to do so, relative to the time required?
I got one of these "guest editor" invitations a few days ago, and I took it as an indication that the journal, which I hadn't heard of before, is junk.
@AndreasBlass: The journal is from a legitimate publisher.
Disciplines are typically organized in loose groups around a fairly small number of persons. They organize conferences, are editors, are on boards of professional organizations, etc. They are always looking for the next generation, new researchers who could take over when they retire. Being a guest editor for a journal, organize a workshop, chair a session, etc. signals that you might be the next generation. Having a reputation of being the next generation won't hurt when you aply for your next job. It is also good practice for when you become a regular editor.
The advantage of being a guest editor is that you can invite people to submit papers to the issue you are editing. If there is no fee charged to authors, then the invitees may view this as a favor. They might provide you with a favor in return.
You can also invite authors who are likely to cite your own work.
Your institution's tenure and promotion committee may view serving as a guest editor favourably.
Edit: You should certainly never solicit any reward or repayment from any authors you invite.
BE CAREFUL, I think favor-based invitations are not ethical. And You can also invite authors who are likely to cite your own work is absolutely wrong, check this http://retractionwatch.com/2018/02/02/three-papers-retracted-cited-frequently/.
@Haz I disagree. How would you go about inviting people who will not view it as a favor? Are you saying all favors are unethical, or just ones that invite someone to submit a paper? Inviting authors in your area of expertise as the guest editor and inviting authors who are likely to cite your work are indistinguishable strategies. Editorial decisions, however, should be impartial. An invitation to submit and a decision to publish are totally different.
Maybe the better way to say it is building goodwill.
In the journals I’m familiar with, guest editors simply invite papers and write an editorial. The invited papers go through the regular peer review process with the normal associate editors.
-1. For an editor to send out invitations to submit papers with the intent of benefiting themselves in such a way would be unethical and an abuse of the editor’s power. You can send invitations, and it’s fine if those invitations generate “goodwill”, but that shouldn’t be your goal, and it shouldn’t influence your decisions of whom to send such invitations to. Nor should the invitations be formulated in a way that makes them appear as “favors” or contain insinuations that they are conditioned on some kind of quid pro quo.
@DanRomik I did not address what goals a guest editor should have. That was not part of the question. I strongly agree that nothing should be insinuated. However I do not see how invitations could be issued without leading to these indirect benefits. This is what the asker wanted to know.
Personally, I do not care one bit what the "intent" was, it is the actual actions that matter. The intent of self-promotion or the intent of contributing to the discipline can both lead to high quality academic work. They can also both lead to low quality work.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.468207 | 2018-02-03T00:50:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/103198",
"authors": [
"Andreas Blass",
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Dan Romik",
"Hazem",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68667",
"user71659"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
8586 | Is physics taught using phrases that are too easily misinterpreted, and can this be improved?
To explain, let me pick a particular statement: "the electrostatic force is mediated by the exchange of photons".
When a physicist (or a lecturer) says this, they mean one thing: the process described in detail by QED. When a student (or an amateur) hears this, they think of two electrons, and they imagine photons flying between them. You can imagine what follows: questions like "how do they know where to fly", or "what is the frequency of these photons", or "where does the energy to create those photons come from" etc.
When I was growing up, I had no access to anyone who really understood physics. All I had were books filled to the brim with phrases like the above. It is nearly impossible not to misunderstand something when such loose statements are used, as popular literature tends to omit the extremely important "but"s.
For example, in the statement above, the "but"s omitted are "but we don't actually mean photons, in fact we don't mean any particle at all; what we mean is a mathematical tool we use to calculate how the interaction works, which is reminiscent of actual photons in so many ways that we can often treat the calculations as if they involved actual photons".
What is the most effective way to educate students about such phenomena, where our language we use to describe them risks obscuring the reality, and/or misleading the students? Is there evidence in the pedagogic literature on this?
The situation with virtual photons is made even worse because the wiggly internal lines in Feynman diagrams look a lot like the wiggly external lines.
The problem is, the language of science is mathematics, and the words used to refer to the math -- like those used in ANY profession -- are not English but jargon, with very specific meanings which are not fully congruent with how English uses the same word. Unfortunately the alternative of inventing completely new words to distinguish these would both involve HUGE amounts of work and lose the analogies which caused us to pick this vocabulary. And nothing less will stop people who insist upon deliberately ignoring cantextual meaning from creating misunderstandings. They ain't worth the effort
That is why hire teachers: they not just read up a book, but teach kids how to interpret the sentences and warn about possible missinterpretations.
I've been thinking of this exact topic from a pedagogic standpoint for years. I taught high school physics where I had classes that ranged from 9th grade Conceptual Physics, to APB (non-calculus) physics, to APC (calculus-based) physics, to a 12th grade second physics class for students who wanted more physics but didn't want the rigor of the AP classes. I'm about to begin teaching a college-level Physical Science class where I'm faced with the same problem:
How do I teach the students "physics" (quotation marks in bold) without (a) saying something misleading, and (b) so they get a clear understanding that won't hinder them in future classes.
I believe the answer to that question relies most importantly on the level the students are at (teach to their level so they understand), and also with the explicit caveat that the teacher must tell the students that there are subtleties that will become apparent in future classes. Indeed, some of those subtleties are more than that -- saying that
Energy is the capacity to do work
may be circular and meaningless (as JoeH replied), but to a first approximation and definition it works for the time being, and can be improved upon in later classes. When I give that definition to my students, I always caveat it by saying, "Guess what? This definition isn't perfect, and in future classes you'll learn a more refined definition that involves other concepts that aren't within the scope of this class." (I say that a lot in introductory classes!) To the students that want more information immediately, I point them in the direction of other resources, or move the conversation to office hours.
The hardest part about proceeding with this method is to make sure that you don't lead the students into an incorrect conceptual understanding that is hard to break in future classes. Joe's example of "the potential energy of the ball" being incorrect without the idea of a system is a good one -- there are many times when simplifying too much leads to a fundamental misunderstanding, and as teachers we have to avoid that as much as possible. Learning what does and doesn't lead to misunderstanding takes time, but being able to formulate precise assessments (whether test-based, or clicker-based, or on homework, etc.) goes a long way towards determining whether or not a student has a proper understanding that doesn't involve misconceptions. If those misconceptions arise during the assessment, it is the teacher's duty to go back and clarify, or re-teach if necessary.
JoeH listed a number of physics concepts that take a concentrated effort to teach properly, but I think all disciplines have those problems:
Chemistry: electrons do not orbit in "shells," despite what millions of students learn every year in elementary school.
Computer Science: in some cases, bubblesort does beat quicksort.
Mathematics: the internal angles of a triangle do not always add up to 180º. Five times five does not always equal twenty-five.
English: passive voice is not always wrong.
History: a historian does not always have to be unbiased
(apologies for examples that aren't perfectly clear -- I'd be happy to amend my answer with better examples!)
This is also a problem in Chemistry. It seems students are "taught Chemistry" in their first two-semester, general inorganic Chemistry course. Then they are re-taught Chemistry in organic because everything they know is wrong. Then they get to physical Chemistry and are re-taught Chemistry once more. This repeats ad nauseam until the student graduates.
"Five times five..." No, you're linking to 0x5. Hexadecimal is not decimal. And 0x19 is the hex representation of 25 anyway.
A very good question.
I usually deal with this like:
"Vectors usually have magnitude and direction. Their components are usually scalars. There are more difficult cases, do you really want to deal with them now? [People sigh or say "noooo"] So, here is an example... Now we can continue.".
Of course, strict definitions give some comfort, but may also result in misunderstanding. It's good to confess that every detail is very difficult and even You, The Teacher, can not answer everything.
By default, you must know very well what you talk about. Then you can give some simple example, then a difficult one and ask them if they want to analyse it now. They usually say "nooo" and you proceed.
There are usually enthusiasts and passive people in a single classroom. It's a good practise to let enthusiasts give one or two questions above the course during the break, so that everyone gets what he's interested in. An interaction with your audience gives better feeling of what they actually need explained.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.468542 | 2013-03-13T12:53:15 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8586",
"authors": [
"Andreas Blass",
"B J V",
"Exit47",
"FJC",
"Greg",
"Izkata",
"Jonathan E. Landrum",
"Mark",
"Michael Andersen Lundsveen",
"Nico Adamo",
"Shahzad Aslam",
"aardwolf",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10225",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117716",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1196",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14755",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20778",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20781",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20782",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20783",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20815",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20817",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20818",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20819",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7134",
"keshlam",
"omc",
"xyguo"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
16721 | How much detail to include in first email to potential PhD supervisor?
First, I must mention that I found these questions helpful:
Prospective PhD contacts potential supervisor but receives no answer after 2-3 emails, what to do?
What to do when emails to a potential advisor are not replied?
Should résumés be attached in a mail to a professor?
Yet, I am looking for more precise answers to the questions below.
I plan to apply for a PhD in Computer Science this year in several countries, mainly Europe, Australia and Canada. I am looking for a PhD with funding. As far as I know, I should contact potential supervisor as a first step. However, I am not sure about how much detail should be included in this first email. Specifically, with regards to the first email, I would like to hear advice on on the following:
Generally, how much detail should I provide?
Should I ask about the chance of getting funding?
Should I send documents or only if s/he asks for?
Statement of purpose/motivation, what is the right length? Is s/he ready to read two pages about every applicant sends him/her email?
Taking into account that this is the first email to the potential supervisor and he might spend only 10 seconds scanning it, What is right answers for the questions above that make the supervisor starts a discussion rather than sending negative response or even ignore the email?
It's not the first step when admissions are done at the departmental level; this is only true if the individual professors hire the PhD students directly.
Thanks @aeismail , That's totally true. In my initial quest specially in Germany, I found most of them hire based on he supervisor' opinion. Do you agree with that ?
My answer is going to extend up this earlier answer to a similar, although broader, question.
Some background: I have worked with two pretty well-known professors in Austria and Switzerland, and can provide some insight into how they tend to hire. I assume other professors have similar MOs, but not every person is the same, so your milage may vary.
Indeed, for both of them, the first step towards starting a PhD is to send them a short informal mail stating your interest in joining their group. Your challenge is to get the professor interested despite him reading maybe a 100 mails a day. You can already see why a two-page text has a 0% chance of being read, same is true for an attached CV or an elaborate research proposal - you need to convince in maybe 10 seconds. Your second challenge is to separate yourself from the dozen or so other people that are trying the same every week, mainly coming from universities in the far east.
In that light, here are answers to your questions
Generally, how much and deep details should I provide?
I would go for none, honestly. Discuss concrete research ideas at a later point, when the professor has shown interest.
Should I mention anything about fund chances?
God no.
Should I send documents or only if s/he asks for.
Yes.
Statement of purpose/motivation, what is the right length? Is s/he ready to read two pages about every applicant sends him/her email?
Forget it. None of the professors that I worked with is interested in those formal application documents at any point during the process. They will either want to skype with you or have one of their senior staff skype with you, and then you would explain the things you would write into a SOP. To be clear - I have received a PhD student, a postdoc, and a senior postdoc position without ever being asked for a SOP or letter of motivation. Those are required only if hiring is done by a committee, e.g., for faculty staff.
Here is an example of a mail that might work on the people that I know.
Dear FIRST-NAME,
I am currently looking into options for getting a PhD. I have looked into your work on IMPORTANT-THING-PROF-IS-WORKING-ON, and I would be really interested in joining you on this line of work.
I have recently graduated from XY with a degree in YZ, and I have a background in SOMETHING-RELATED-TO-THE-ABOVE. I have done internships at BIG-NAME-A and BIG-NAME-B and already published X papers on SOMETHING-RELATED-TO-THE-ABOVE during my masters.
I would be happy if we could discuss matters further via Skype.
thank you in advance,
YOUR-FIRST-NAME
YOUR-WEB-PAGE
Note the informal tone. This might be a personal preference of the people I know, but an informal mail is significantly more likely to be read by both of my professors than a very formal one. Further, note that it will be required that you have some measure of achievements that the professor can relate to - graduating from a university that the professor maybe has never heard of alone will not be enough to get him interested. Already having published and/or having done internships at well-known companies (well-known also to the professor!), especially those that are known to have competitive selection schemes (e.g., IBM), helps a lot here. Do not bother sending your GPA etc. - people in Europe tend to not be interested in grades in my experience.
Another thing that might help with the people I know is work on open source projects (e.g., being a committer or committee member to one or more Apache projects, having a well-maintained Github page with interesting tools and Gists, etc.), but this may be mostly because I work in software engineering (and people that know how software is built in real-life are very valuable to us).
Another important topic is english language - if you cannot speak / write english well, let the mail be proof-read by somebody who can (according to the way the question is written, this should not be an issue for the OP, but this may be relevant to other readers). Mails in terrible english are almost always discarded immediately.
Finally, the above sample contains a link to a web page. Have a personal academic web page. This is the place where you would put a good picture of you and all your academic achievements (papers, CVs, research interests, internships, links to open source projects you contributed to, industry projects that you worked on, whatever). Make it look professional and pretty.
Note that this mail still has a high chance of being ignored. In that case, give the professor a week or so and then write a a one-line reminder as a reply or forward of the original mail. If he does not respond after that, move on. Then he is just not that into you.
Will it seem awkward if I do this for an MS admissions as well? I am planning to do a MS in US with thesis and I am applying to this particular college for this particular professor who I wish to be my thesis adviser.
"Those are required only if hiring is done by a committee, e.g., for faculty staff." - so you mean that SOP are meant to be written for and read by faculty staff, not the professors themselves, right? Also, isn't going none for deep detail eliminate your chance to prove that you have a well-developed research interest?
To add: make sure any attachment is small. I hate getting MBytes of attachments. Asking for funding is a big no no, especially in Australian unis
Do not send a stock standard email. I delete all those. If the email says they have read my work and it is obvious they have copied and pasted some titles of my papers then they are lying. Delete!
At most write an email about 6-8 lines long; people are busy. You should introduce yourself, explain what kind of research you want to do, ask he/she if she is taking on a student, and reference a few of their recent papers that you are interested and why. Include a small CV attached in the email.
If the professor responds, and offers to answer questions, then ask about funding. Statement of purpose length should be specified in the application process. Don't send your statement of purpose unless they specifically ask for it on their website.
It really depends on the field, but using these general guidelines almost every potential advisor responded this application season. Just because they respond doesn't mean you will get in, but it should improve your chances if you come off in a positive light.
Good luck.
Thank you, I'm applying for Computer science. My next question is, when I refer to the supervisor papers, how deep should I discuss papers? Should I provide new ideas on how to build on his work or it is enough to talk generally like I'm doing literature review without any conclusions?
How deep can you get in 6-8 lines and still provide other information? Just enough to show the professor you have done your homework on them and you can relate it to your future/current research interests with them.
I spoke to many supervisors in my applications for Computational Biology PhD's in the UK and got very enthusiastic and positive responses and lots of offers. They pretty all went something along the lines of:
Dear X,
I am a X student at X and I've been looking at your work in X and I'm very interested in doing a PhD in this area, do you have any positions available? Also do you have any time to Skype so we can talk about your work? I have done X which is why I am interested in X and my experience is detailed further in my CV (attached).
Best wishes, X
Obviously omitting/changing details if they have advertisements for positions out etc which you can then say you have seen, I recommend making your CV as strong as possible and also offering to Skype shows you are willing to spend time talking to them! I also sometimes asked them whether they would consider me or checked whether they felt I was complementary to the group/had the right skills.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.469236 | 2014-02-09T03:54:23 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16721",
"authors": [
"Aditya",
"Adrian Mann",
"Berendschot",
"Hawk",
"Heijne",
"Mal Fillian",
"Neo",
"NotLikeThis",
"Ooker",
"Priyanka Modi",
"Prof. Santa Claus",
"Suman Behera",
"Teresa",
"aeismail",
"arendellean",
"atw",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118069",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118070",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125887",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/188812",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45037",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45038",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45039",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45043",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45052",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45061",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48474",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6416",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6898",
"thilakshiK"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
19151 | My Supervisors are not helping in writing recommendations letters
Maybe they are helping and I am the one who does not know how things really work and that's why I am seeking help here.
I am about to finish my Master in Computer science (waiting for the oral exam). And this is the time to apply for as many as possible PhD programs. The problem is that many of PhD programs ask for at least two recommendation letters (sometimes three) and they do not accept general recommendation letter. Rather, they send to the referee's email and ask him/her to write. Therefore, for each of them my referees should write a separate evaluation. So far I got them to write for three applications (two got rejected already). However, I feel I am still at the beginning and there are so many programs I need to try. I am totally aware of the program suitability and I should not apply for a program that I'm not 100% sure I have good chance.
Now the problem is that I chase my referees to write one letter and sometimes I miss deadlines because they are busy or not responding. I found only this question is very useful here but the issue is I follow all steps there to help them to write my recommendation letters, but they mostly do not. I am one of top 5% students of theirs and I published three papers with them.
I feel like I am stuck between the hammer and the rock here. My question is what is the best tactic I can follow at this stage? Cut down the number of programs I apply for? Or talk to the supervisor about the issue. What advice do you have for me? I really appreciate your advice.
Should not be some rule that does not allow down vote without a comment ?!!
@CharlesMorisset Thank you for both of you. I tried to update my question. I hope it is less of a rant-like question now
I don't know how many letters you're asking people to write for you. However, when there is a separate form that needs to be filled out for each letter, that is asking for a considerable expenditure of time for your advisors. You need to be aware of this, and plan accordingly. You can't ask people to fill out fifty forms for you at once, and then complain when they can't get it done!
So it's not really about applying to "as many PhD programs as possible." Your advisors should be working with you to select the schools and programs you are going to apply to, and you should be working with them to ensure that you are not placing too large a burden on them. This includes giving them a list that clearly states all the schools and programs to which you are applying, as well as the deadlines, as early as possible, so that they have time to plan accordingly. Then, if there's no response a few days beforehand, you need to send a polite email.
But to keep sending out request after request for more letters in a season is a good way to annoy your letter writers. Organize and plan in advance.
Whether this answer is applicable to the OP's problem depends a bit on the country. There are some where "Your advisors should be working with you to select the schools and programs you are going to apply to" would be very uncommon (e.g., Germany).
I'm working in Germany. The professor might not be able to help—but the student's direct Betreuer (supervisor) should be talking with the student about this! [Of course, if it's a good student, they'll want to keep them internally, but that's a difference between "does" and "should."]
@aeismail Thank you for the advice. Over the past six months I asked for four recommendation letters though. I am battling to get it for the fourth application now. I missed the third one's deadline. I informed them with all details a month ahead and sent reminders 2 weeks ahead. Three days before the deadline they promised to send. I ended up to find only one has sent while the second has not. My application has been discarded as a result. Today I am only four days away from another deadline and none of the three letters has been sent. My calls, SMS and emails are not being answered.
@aeismail I must say that I am still working under their supervision and two papers published with them another two are pending. I have written all papers entirely with implementations and everything without even a guidance from any of them. Naturally, I do not expect them to help me in PhD application. I am fine with that but I am disappointed because I feel I need to apply for many programs (taken into account the suitability) before I get admitted to one.
OK—four is not an unreasonable number. I'm sorry to hear that they're entirely abrogating on their duty (it is their responsibility to write letters of recommendation for students they supervise!). This may be one of the cases where you might just have to track them down physically, sit down with them, and have them submit things while you're there. (Having everything prepared in advance, unfortunately, even though it's unethical, is still less unethical than what they're doing.)
I think that you should not worry too much; you mentioned that you have already published three papers with them, and that is the important part. For a PhD what it counts more to the admission committee is to see if you have research skills, and that number of papers it is pretty good.
Maybe you should try to approach one of your past professors directly, I mean to drop a visit and tell them about your problem. Take in consideration that most of them have a heavy duty work and that is why they are forgetting about your recommendation letters. Bottom line, approach to them directly and try not only with one, but with every professor that knows you and that have worked directly with you. I believe that they will be more than happy to help you. So relax and good luck!
I disagree with the first part of this answer. "Number of papers" alone is not a great indicator of research skills. A few papers co-authored with a professor mean a lot more if accompanied by a strong reference letter saying "hawk made the following essential contributions to our co-authored papers: ..."
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.469967 | 2014-04-10T04:22:35 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19151",
"authors": [
"Arun Gupta",
"DCTLib",
"George",
"Hawk",
"Kevin Selva Prasanna",
"Nirav Madariya",
"aeismail",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52148",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52153",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52157",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52158",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52163",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52169",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6416",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7390",
"shalop",
"shiraz",
"user1010101010"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
13896 | What to do when a PhD supervisor is not collaborating on publications after the PhD from it?
If someone's (SO) PhD supervisor is not collaborating on publications from SO's PhD. The problem arose as SO raised his mistrust (for the supervisor) on other academic issues. The supervisor treats student's work as his, and SO does not agree with that.
SO has one paper just rejected from a journal but could be submitted in another journal. This is from SO's PhD, so he would like to publish it and more from the PhD. SO is not sure how to go ahead with this, (with the supervisor or without). The paper is intellectually SO's but the supervisor helped in improving the writing (of the rejected paper). As the supervisor is refusing to collaborate, how can SO publish that? Can SO do that without supervisor name? What could be the consequences?
If the advisor made a substantial intellectual contribution (or, in fields where it's relevant, procured the grant supporting the work), there's not much the author can do to publish the paper without the advisor's permission. The advisor would have claim to authorship rights if:
the paper grew out of work proposed by the advisor, or was supported by funds accrued by the advisor;
the student discussed the work with the advisor and gained useful feedback or guidance about the direction or results of the project;
the advisor contributed to the writing of the paper.
The last point is definitely true; it's not clear if the first two points hold, but they very well could, given the situation described.
Basically, if the advisor has authorship rights, the student is more or less screwed if they try to publish. If they publish the paper, with an author who has not given permission for submission or without an author who has authorship rights, then that is sufficient grounds for retraction of a paper.
Unless the author received no support from the advisor — I think you misspelled "Unless the advisor made no significant intellectual contribution to the work". I do not automatically have authorship rights to my PhD students' work, even if I paid them to work on a problem I proposed. (This is field-specific.)
@JeffE: It is in part field-specific. In engineering, it's essentially unheard of to publish a paper without your advisor's name appearing on it. But I've made it clearer—I meant support in all its forms, intellectual and financial.
Um... According to my university, I'm an engineer. And the revision doesn't really help, since financial support does not necessarily buy coauthorship. What you presumably mean is "If someone has contributed enough to be a coauthor, you absolutely cannot publish without their permission, even (especially?) if that someone is your former advisor."
I will try to add my perspective, since I have been in sort-of an opposite situation. In many places and fields, improving the writing is considered as a part of the job of your supervisor, and if the result is yours, it is yours. I mean, your supervisor is there to learn you how to write papers, and only if you do the research together, it is necessary to include his name on the paper. (Disclaimer: this is only one point of view, and only on the ethics, not on the legal view).
Example: I have a paper where I'm the only author. We were writing the paper down together with my supervisor, and it was certainly her who had more ideas on how to write things down (especially the introduction and the conclusions), which articles should be cited etc. Still, all the ideas were mine, all the proofs were mine (it's theoretical CS), so she said that I should be the only author.
What should you do? No, you should not, in my opinion, submit the results without your supervisor's consent. IMHO you can:
Try to approach him again.
Ask someone else at the same department for help. Just be careful who you choose, either it should be someone you know well and who knows you well, or someone who is dedicated for these cases: someone who should be approached in case of conflicts. The solution is not clear at all, and having insight from someone close in topic, scientific habits etc. could be helpful.
Publish your thesis electronically on some public repository; this is at least a step how to make your result visible to the community, and you certainly doesn't need your supervisor's permission to do that. For instance arXiv accepts theses.
I have a paper where I'm the only author. However, my supervisor likely wrote more of the text than I did, especially the introduction, she chose the references etc — Please tell me this is hypothetical. Because if it's not, your advisor has seriously failed you. Never let your advisor do work for you, (Yes, I'm also in TCS.)
@JeffE It is true. I was probably exaggerating. I basically mean that we were sitting next to each other and she was showing me the way how to do it. And needed to say, it was during my masters, and it was the very first publication I've had. I'll try to make it clearer.
From an objective point of view, this is a matter of publication ethics. You appear to clearly be the first author, meaning you have provided most of the input from original idea through intellectual work including drawing conclusions.
It is not clear to me if you are past your PhD or in the middle of the PhD. Again, objectively, this would not make any difference but in practise, it involves more. If you are past your PhD, your advisor is not much more than any colleague and you as first author should be able to decide what to do with your work, still considering any co-workers who has made sufficient input to warrant co-authorship. If, on the other hand is still in your PhD you need to think about what you need to do to finish your degree. There must be people around with who you can discuss your situation and the way forward. Providing clear advise on this is quite individual and involves much more than can be deduced from your question.
In both cases, you should make an attempt to properly assess the contributions from all involved in the work. This will provide you with something tangible to use when discussing or defending your rights. Note that you need to include all parts of the process from original idea to the finished product. Many forget the initial question which is where an advisor usually provides much insight. At the same time, providing non-scientific input on writing, is not worth as much as many would think. After all, you could probably buy such a service and no-one would dream of co-authorship. It is as you have indicated the scientific intellectual work that counts.
A difficulty arises when someone, in this case the advisor, refuses to publish the material. Of course if the reason is that the material is not good enough that is one thing, if it is a personal conflict it is another. The rejected paper is a non-product as I see it. To resubmit, you need to make revisions and then resubmit. You need to send the manuscript to your co-authors (advisor) and state that you are planning to submit to another journal and that you would wish to retain him (and the others) as co-author(s), and invite comments and input.
I recommend you to look at the following links ICMJE, APA, Am. Psych., PARE and Union University, AuthorOrder.com to provide a few. the point is: build your own view and knowledge about authorship/contributorship to strengthen your position.
All authors of a paper need to agree to submission of a paper. Failure to secure everyone's agreement for submission of a paper is usually sufficient grounds for retraction.
Yes, but the question I am getting at is who should be on it.
You also said: "you as first author should be able to decide what to do with your work." This is not true.
Do you see anyone else deciding what to do with the PhD material than the PhD student? I do not intend to start a discussion but will think about rephrasing the points you in my opinion have have extrapolated a little too far.
The co-authors of a paper have to decide that jointly—including the advisor. All of their names appear on the paper, so they all have a right to decide what should happen with the paper.
Thanks for the critical comments. I have revised the answer but it seems we are approaching the post from opposite directions, advisor's rights vs. student's rights and only the OP will be able to assess the real case.
The question will benefit from some more clarification. Basically, I feel that just because he has a reputation to claim others' work does not grant you the right to bend the logical decision of assigning authorship.
"Improving the writing" can generally be considered as significant input and thus should lead to an authorship. Whether it may be downgraded to being acknowledged depends on the degree and magnitude of improvement. Changing a couple words here and there probably should go to acknowledgement; anything on par or beyond line editing should conservatively go to authorship, unless it's done by a paid editor/copywriter.
Another information we need to know is what is the supervisor's status in the rejected paper. If he was listed as a co-author, then in subsequent revisions he should be retained as a co-author even he can no longer contribute. An exception is that he explicitly refuses to be listed as a co-author in the next round and on.
Lastly, we'd need to know how did this adviser "refuse to collaborate." Did he refuse to do anything because he believes the first version is good enough? Is he too busy? Or did he say you should drop this article? The stated action is up for too many different interpretations.
Without too many details, I'd say keep him, resubmit and then move on without this person. And should you so loath the idea that he may claim your work, then cut the connection, forget about this paper, and publish independently from him on something new.
This raises a question of what to do if a collaborator has made significant contributions but refuses to be listed as a coauthor. Perhaps that is a question in itself.
I'm no expert on the legalities/ethics of academic publishing. However, here are my 2 cents.
I think if you want to publish papers based on your PhD you should do so.
As far as I know, there is nothing that requires you to get your supervisor's permission to publish your own PhD work. You are also not required to work with him if you don't want to. I think there may be some pressure to put his name on the paper, even if he has not done anything.
So, if I want to go ahead, I would do so. If/when the paper (or papers) get to the point of submission, it might be a good idea to ask him if he wants his name included on the paper.
It sounds from what you say that you already don't have good relations with your supervisor, so you don't have a lot to lose.
This is completely wrong: the author has a lot to lose. If someone else has authorship rights on a publication (as is likely the case here) and you do not list them as an author, the excluded author can get the paper retracted.
@aeismail: According to the question: "The paper is intellectually SO's but the supervisor helped in improving the writing (of the rejected paper)." The supervisor is now refusing to collaborate. I think the author is well within his rights to proceed. I said "it might be a good idea to ask him if he wants his name included on the paper". I could strengthen this to "it is advisable to ask him...", but the point remains that the author does not require his supervisor's permission to publish his own work. He is not the supervisor's slave or servant.
The excluded author can't get the paper retracted if the author can prove (a) the intellectual content of the paper is mostly his (b) that the supervisor was unwilling to collaborate (c) that the supervisor was asked whether he wants his name on the paper and said no. Documentation in this cases is obviously a very good idea. He could (and likely would) make himself unpleasant to the author, but that is another issue.
If an author renounces a claim to authorship, that's one thing. But so long as she retains those rights, she has the right to block submission if she feels that the manuscript is not ready. Refusal to collaborate does not excuse the corresponding author from securing permission. And "mostly his" is not sufficient: it must be entirely the student's work.
@aeismail: I'm not aware of any such rules. Do you have any citations/documentation for this? One question to ask here is how would one determine the validity of a claim on authorship? In practice I suppose this is something the journal would determine.
Just take a look at Retraction Watch and the articles related to authorship issues, which are about 5 to 6 percent of the total set of articles they've covered.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.470457 | 2013-11-06T12:58:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13896",
"authors": [
"Abhay",
"Deepak",
"EzraEn",
"Faheem Mitha",
"Jason",
"JeffE",
"Jessica",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Perplexed",
"Peter Jansson",
"aeismail",
"akukas",
"harveyslash",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/285",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35814",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35815",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35816",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35817",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35829",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35832",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43168",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43171",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43179",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43199",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43254",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43272",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"isomorphismes",
"torrey garcia",
"user1992705",
"vrwim",
"yo'"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
25993 | How to Cite With Inconsistent Use of Initials
There is a paper I want to cite where, on the title page of the article, the authors names appear without any middle initials (i.e., one of the authors is Mark Smith). However, this one author frequently publishes using his middle initials (i.e., Mark E. Smith). What is the appropriate way to cite this-with the name as it appears in the article, or the name as the author typically uses it? For what it's worth, the source article appear in a mathematical journal, and I want to cite it in a paper that will eventually appear in a mathematical journal.
You should use the exact information which is provided on the published paper, not the real or current information of the author; even if his name or affiliation1 is change at the present time.
Moreover, the correct way of citation of each paper is provided in the webpage of its publisher and you can check how they have mentioned the author's name in the citation example (you may also download the bibtex or other outputs to be used in citation manager softwares). At least, by checking the publisher website, you will be sure how they prefer their published paper to be cited (even if other possibilities/doubts for correct citation exists).
1I know that affiliation is not mentioned in citation, but if somebody wants the affiliation of the author at the time of publishing the paper, the best source is the information written on the paper and is provided in its publisher's website.
I've never seen a citation to a paper that included the affiliation of any of the authors.
@DavidRicherby Me either, but I wanted to say that the correct affiliation of the author at the time of publishing the paper is mentioned in the webpage of the paper in the publisher's website; besides to his correct name which is mentioned on the paper and an example of citation which publisher prefers to be used in other sources.
You need to cite articles the way the name is expressed in each article. The purpose of the reference if for others to be able to locate the source you have used and so making the reference accurate is essential. It may seem like nit-picking since most of the reference will be correct except for one initial but it is better to simply follow the the generic rule to follow the article in all details than to modify it. One instance where this may matter is when article references are listed in, for example, Web of Science. There an article may end up as two entries if there is a difference in the way it is referenced. I have seen and personally have articles that have multiple entries because of this and because people wrote the wrong year, volume etc. Still, the importance lies in being able to trace your sources and being correct makes that easier.
I'd recommend to use the DOI in any case, especially if the journal you publish in converts DOIs to clickable links, which should fully address Peter's utterly valid point (+1).
What if the journal/conference paper does not have a DOI?
I strongly disagree; see the upvoted answer in the duplicated question. Citation practice should not depend on bugs in Web of Science's software.
@JeffE, that is not my main point either. I can remove that part if it irritates you.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.471620 | 2014-07-16T18:12:26 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/25993",
"authors": [
"Adrián Pol",
"David Richerby",
"JeffE",
"JohnP",
"Peter Jansson",
"Pol",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"WildEarth",
"Y K",
"Yann",
"enthu",
"hakomaster",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69329",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69330",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69331",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69332",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69333",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69340",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69357",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69385",
"tuschenski"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
14036 | Is scanning an handwritten peer-review suitable for editor/authors?
I peer-reviewed a manuscript and am about to send my conclusions to the editor. It occurs to me, though, that because there are many details to be checked/changed in various places of the paper (mathematical notations, in particular), it will take quite some time for me to type it into a proper review (probably using TeX, because it is math-heavy).
So, I am wondering: since my hand-writing is decent and people don't usually find it too hard to decipher, could I simply scan my annotated copy of the paper, along with one page of notes, to the editor? Or will that be unacceptable to them?
I think it raises a few questions, going from practicalities:
will it be as useful as a thoroughly written-down review?
does it give more work to the editor?
should I also include a summary of my comments, in computerized form?
to ethical questions:
does handwritten notes breach rules of anonymity?
I suppose people used to do that in older times, but it have never received a hand-written review so far, so it is (at least in my field) unusual.
So: should I do it? if I do it, what precautions should I take?
Is your handwriting so distinctive that you suspect the authors will be able to identify it?
I have received hand-written reviews twice, on a sample of ca. 20 submitted papers in applied mathematics. Once it was comments from a (not-anonymous) editor; the other time it was supposed to be anonymous. It ended up quite easy to identify, but it probably would have been identifiable even from a pdf. The two were from the same workgroup, so they are not really "independent samples".
Many reviews, at least in math, are of mediocre quality -- based on a skimming rather than a thorough reading of the paper. In contrast, it sounds like you are writing a review that both the editors and the authors will be extremely grateful for.
Re your last point: you could also worry about anonymity being breached not because of your handwriting, but because your scanner will quite probably add metadata to the scanned image.
@BSteinhurst The style of handwriting can give away a lot about the writer, including: where they learned to write (country/region), how old they are, their gender. If the field they work in is small enough, it will surely help in guessing their identity. But then there are plenty of other things that can give away the review anyway, compared to which handwriting might be a small thing.
Is your handwriting clear enough that a possibly-non-native editor and/or author can read it? I wouldn't dare use my handwriting for business correspondance
I do not think that there is anything wrong with a scanned handwritten report. As for anonymity: you may even sign your referee report as it is your decision to stay anonymous or not. As for usefulness: I once received an annotated scanned manuscript as a referee report at is was tremendously helpful (as there were several suggestions for formulations which greatly increased the readability). A computerized summary would also be helpful for the editor to form the decision and also for the authors to find out what you main points are (so that they can distinguish between just typo corrections and serious remarks).
In a blind peer-review process, I think revealing your identity without the editor's consent is not allowed
Not sure - I've heard somebody say that he always writes reports non-anonymously (see the answers to the questions here http://mathoverflow.net/questions/98308/when-if-ever-disclose-your-identity-as-a-reviewer).
then that would be a nice separate question (/me winks)
A hand written scanned review is acceptable, if readable. But, the time spent on typing it into LaTeX (or any other suitable format) to produce a pdf is strongly advised. The reason is that even the most neat hand-writing, can include letters, symbols, writing details, that can be ambiguous to others (particular of other nationalities). So although, such reviews are acceptable, providing it in digital format reduces the risk of misreading and misinterpretation. In addition, a scanned hand-written review may be conceived as the result of someone not caring too much (however wrong that conclusion may be). So in the interest of clarity, I would suggest spending the time typing the review in.
If your copy of the paper is in pdf format, then you can attach typed notes to it fairly easily. A program called Skim does that, and I think modern pdf viewers also have that capability. (It would be good for me if more people used that option, so that authors who get a referee report of that sort can't easily infer that I'm the referee. My own handwriting has become so lousy that handwritten notes are no longer an option.)
Are you sure that people can't identify you from a Skim'ed PDF? I'd wonder about Skim silently adding metadata.
If your handwriting is clear and you make a lot of small corrections, I would personally prefer to get your notes in the paper itself, scanned. The reason is that it's much easier to understand what's going on, and much easier to see where the mistakes have appeared. I would say that adding a separate report that contains long remarks (on structural things, mistakes in math proofs etc.) is a good idea and should be done, since long text is hard to squeeze into the page margins1.
Just a remark to finish: please, use a red pen and make a color scan.
I don't agree with people saying that doing a lot of corrections is necessarily wrong (well, it's another question). Many reviewers do a poor job, and many reviewers are too sensitive. But it's very likely that a good paper needs a lot of corrections.
1 Ask Fermat, he knows something about this.
I have received hand-marked manuscript review previously, and it did not raise an issue to neither the editor nor myself and my co-authors. However there is a point you should consider:
Is it really a substantial and reliable paper if it needs such an extensive correction even in mathematical parts? I have been rejected on the basis of too many typos or too poor grammar, which I don't think should necessarily be a deciding factor. I will only reject people based on bad grammar only if it significantly hurts the understanding of the paper's material.
Extensively erroneous mathematics sounds something like a substantial problem with the quality of the research and not only the quality of presentation.
I don't agree with the last paragraph. "Mathematical typos" are very common and are not necessarily cause for rejection. As a reviewer, I've submitted reports with multiple pages of mathematical corrections and a recommendation of "strongly accept". And if I were an editor, I'd be ticked off if a reviewer suggested rejection of an otherwise strong paper because of easily corrected minor errors.
One point that no-one has mentioned yet: after receiving your review, the authors will (probably) take your comments into account, make changes, and then write a letter explaining the changes which they submit along with the revised version.
In their letter explaining changes, it is common (at least in my field) to answer reviewer's comments point-by-point and to include verbatim the reviewer's questions, e.g.
Reviewer 1, Comment 2: "Jones et al. (2001) needed more froobiz to reach the wiznish point. Why do you find a different value?"
In this study we used an improved floopnosh technique which inherently requires less froobiz; see also the review by Smith (2004).
So, if the authors decide to go this route and you submit a hand-written review, they will have to TeX-ify your review document, possibly making errors in the process.
Well, I don't expect authors' comment on every small thing I pointed out. usually something like "We thanks for the minor suggestions from the reviewer, we considered them". After all, I don't expect the authors to agree with everything I suggest, but I expect them to want their paper to be good, so I expect them to check all my suggestions.
No, I definitely agree that authors shouldn't agree with every point a reviewer makes. But when the authors disagree, they should state why. And preferrably with something (like a citation) to back it up. Some times, the paper is improved by adding a sentence like "Here, one might think that , but as was shown in <recent paper/equation X/section N>, this is not correct."
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.471977 | 2013-11-12T11:15:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14036",
"authors": [
"Anonymous",
"BSteinhurst",
"Cristian Em.",
"DAC",
"Davidson Rumondor",
"Debkalpa Goswami",
"Dirk",
"F'x",
"Federico Poloni",
"Julio Oregon",
"Mohamed Ayad",
"Munire ",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Parker",
"Rocky78",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"Szabolcs",
"Will",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10225",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11565",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11907",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142555",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142671",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142672",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27555",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36205",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36206",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36207",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36209",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/529",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73737",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73743",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73919",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73920",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7561",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"keshlam",
"semi-extrinsic",
"user1038894",
"yo'"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
74749 | Is it possible to do good research on a certain area through self-learning the state-of-the-art of the area?
I’m currently doing my masters in chemical engineering in a relatively unknown university here in the Philippines. For my master’s thesis, I am planning to theoretically model transport processes of spray drying of nutraceuticals. Neither my advisor nor any other professors here are experts on the subject.
I wish to know:
Is it still possible to do publishable or even outstanding research by learning the state-of-the-art of the area, specifically about transport modelling, by myself?
How can I approach this dilemma? (I just need the extra boost in confidence since I am wading through unknown waters here.)
I do have experience on research and writing papers as I have experienced it during my bachelors. Also, I do think people in my current department will be able to understand my research since the topic that I want to pursue largely deals with basic chemical engineering principles. Although, I'm quite in doubt really in my current course of action since none of them are experts on theoretical modelling. I didn't publish anything from my bachelor's work, and I am still relatively a neophyte at research.
My immediate reaction to the title question is "As opposed to what?!" But that reaction relies on quite a bit of experience doing research at all.
Welcome to Academia SE. I edited your question a bit to remove the poll aspect of your question (“I'm looking for people who is/was in a similar position and succeeded”) as such questions are not a good fit for this site. Please check that everything is still according to your intentions.
At some point in a research career you will need to learn directly from papers. Even as a practical programmer, when I wanted the absolute state of the art in an area, I would read academic papers, not wait for the material to show up in textbooks. A researcher often ends up knowing more about their topic than anyone else in the world, not just in their university, and must learn by means that don't depend on access to more knowledgeable people.
That does not mean your proposed course is a wise one at this stage in your career.
As I see it, student research has three objectives:
Learn how to do research
Collect evidence you can do research, in the form of degrees and letters of recommendation.
Contribute to the collective body of knowledge.
You need to decide the weight of these objectives for yourself, but generally the earlier you are in your studies and career, the greater the importance of the first two objectives.
The risk you are potentially taking is sacrificing the first two objectives at a relatively early stage. If your professors do not understand the subject of your research, they may be less able to guide you. It may also be harder for them to judge the quality of your research, which they need to do in order to grant degrees and write recommendation letters.
If you already have really good research skills, the first objective is unnecessary for you. However, if you had that much research experience I doubt you would be asking this question.
You might consider a compromise: Pick some research direction that fits with the research at your university but moves in the direction you want. For example, do a theoretical modeling project that models something your professors do know about.
I'd argue (at least in my own discipline, mathematics) that establishing an up-to-date knowledge base is also critically important to "do research".
@paulgarrett Yes, a good knowledge base is necessary. I think that can be achieved by independent study, at least for my field, computer science.
Patricia, I am willing to believe your claim that the relevant knowledge base can be achieved "independently" in CompSci, and maybe other things. But the way "mathematics" has evolved is much like the stock market (in the U.S.), namely, if one plays by the rules (no insider trading), one will never make money (because everyone else has the same public information), and, by the "gambler's ruin" principle, one eventually goes broke. :) Although many people will not care, I do think it is the case that in contemporary mathematics one cannot get up to the ... [cont'd]
... [contd'] starting line without some mentoring/insider-information. In the U.S., the "REU" bit wildly misleads many people, not just kids... Srsly, if one can generate publishable papers in 8 weeks after one's junior year (3rd, in the U.S.) without having any abstract algebra or modern analysis... "why would a PhD take 5-6 years..." All of that. A very salient point is that "math does not become wrong/old"... which is part of its appeal to me... but is violently different from most other human endeavors.
I commend you guys for giving out such helpful answers. Although, I do want to add though that my advisor, a professor here in my university (in a sense that she has attained the highest rank of being an academic), wanted to branch out to very unfamiliar areas to her and to the department as a whole. As per your arguments here in the thread, you've said that I need an experienced researcher, one who can basically point me to the right questions. Would that statement still hold irregardless of advisor's expertise?
@Nicotinamide Branching out in collaboration and with the support of someone who is already an experienced researcher makes a difference.
As already mentioned, it is quite common that an experienced researcher learns a new topic from scratch – usually to somehow combine it with topics they are already familiar with. One way to do this is to give this extension as a thesis project to an advisee, whose main task is to learn about the new topic and connect it with the group’s existing work. It’s something that happens quite frequently in our work group and may be a good approach for you.
The advisor then learns about the topic through status updates, theses, writing publications with the advisee, and possibly visiting conferences with the advisee. On the other hand, the advisee learns to research through the advisor scrutinising their work – though it may sound a bit trite, a central aspect of research is to ask the right questions and to do this, your advisor does not need to be the foremost expert on your topic. The advisee can also learn about writing, since it does not depend on the subject that much and good papers should be understandable by a broader audience than just experts on that particular topic.
However, this approach may not be suited for everybody and every topic. A few points to consider:
Is your advisor willing to do this and does this fit his style of advising?
How large is the topic that you would have to learn? On a related note: How important are method knowledge, specific subject knowledge, and a wide overview important in your field (or with other words: How strong is specialisation in your field?)? For example, in my interdisciplinary area, new ideas and research often come from people combining concepts of different fields, on which they are not the foremost experts.
Is there a connection between the topic and your advisor’s topic that you can build upon?
Do you have some connection (e.g., via your advisor) to an expert on the topic, who can give feedback on your work every now and then?
All of these things can only be decided who knows your field or supervisor, respectively.
She actually agreed and liked my proposal in doing theoretical modeling on spray drying since one of her projects involve spray drying of nutraceuticals from fruit extracts. I have had some experience on theoretical modeling in some of my courses (transport phenomena and process control) but none of this scale.
Note that probably none of us can make a useful statement about your particular topic, as we are not familiar with it. This is something only you and your advisor can decide.
Yes, I am aware of that and I am also fairly confident that I can see this thesis through. What I am afraid is if I can produce publishable results/papers since I'm basically on my own in doing it my way. Some of the projects in my university are largely experimental and thus most of the professors here are experimentalists by training. I'm doing the opposite.
Not only "experienced", but "well-informed" researcher?
@paulgarrett: Well-informed with respect to what? I fail to understand what your comment is aiming at.
In some fields, for example mine (mathematics), there is a large body of background material necessary to make sense of either currently "live" issues, or the true state of long-standing problems. To exaggerate, it's not enough to "try hard" or to have experience "trying hard" (as some people imagine "research" to be). Although effort is a necessary condition, often there is a large body of information without which one is merely a crank.
I'd stay away from that approach.
Reason: while the papers you consume will contain the cutting edge information, they will not contain the mundane basics of the field, i.e., things that "everybody" knows by practice, just by being around other people. Things that are too trivial to write down.
Ask yourself how important it is that you do a topic that is not common at your university. If you have such strong reasons for it, are they good enough for you to move to another uni (maybe abroad) where there are experts on it? If not, are there really not any experts around which have their own topics you can fit in with?
This answer raises very important points!!! All those unspoken things that "everybody (meaning "insiders") knows" are not easy to see in "the literature"...
Yes, it is possible to learn everything by yourself without expert help, but it will be very inefficient.
I'd pick another subject. Science is full of researchers and entire research groups that are doing qualitatively good work, but are just not at the cutting edge because they have an insufficiently developed overview of the field they are working on.
My prediction is that you will spend too much time learning new things, not enough time actually researching. You'll write something that might be good enough in the end (if you're good), but very likely it will not be anything groundbreaking, and probably will be something that has already been done before or turns out to be trivial.
My suggestion (as you obviously want to do something special) is to pick a normal topic, on which your supervisors are experts, and then try to expand from there if your initial steps are successful.
Beyond learning the state-of-the-art (something that university prepares you for), research worth publishing, especially outstanding one, requires a few other skills. For instance (from my experience):
Can you identify the key relevant papers in the area where you plan to do research? An expert can point you the right direction.
Can you identify the implicit rules in the area that you'll need to follow? Experts might not be able to identify them, but will at least tell you if you're violating them.
Theoretical modeling picks some assumptions and approximations and develops the consequences of those. A good student can do the second part. But it can take more experience to understand well the first part and the implicit rules to follow for a paper (in relation to (2)). Otherwise, you might do perfect work and have its starting point challenged by reviewers.
For outstanding research, can you identify the questions and approaches the community sees as worthwhile?
In my field (programming languages, across computer science and maths), some of those are things I learned during PhD and that aren't written or collected in many places, they're just folklore to experts and are transmitted from advisors to students in a system that resembles in some respects a medieval guild (without any malice implied). I understand that's common in research across fields: that's one reason this website exists, but it's of course not a complete advisor ;-).
Definitely Yes!
The way people do research is changing so rapidly that by the time you finish reading this answer it will probably be out of date. I'll make the intro short and go straight to what you need to solo your (theoretical) research project.
1. Time. When you work in a team of experts in your field, you get things done much quicker. If you work alone, everything takes much longer.
2. Money. You need money to buy time, mainly. If you need to pay off a student loan or work part time to pay the bills, you will probably not have enough time to finish reading all those articles and books in time.
3. Google Scholar. You can find full texts of most of the papers you will ever need there, and an abstract of virtually every paper.
4. Access to book torrent trackers. Legally, this is a grey area, but it puts everyone on the level playing field, whether you are a student from Harvard or some local college in India. Hey, there was a time when it was illegal for women to read. It still is in some countries.
5. Stack Overflow. Present your research results with working code, making it easily reviewable, replicable, and implementable for industry and other researchers. Leveraging the current tech will catapult you to the top.
6. E-mail spam. Once you have the results you suspect someone might be interested in, find them and let them know. These potential targets can be universities you want to apply to for a PhD program, companies that you want to work for, or journal editors that you suspect might be interested in publishing your work. Send a few emails per day, wait for their response, improve your letter (taking into consideration the responses of previous targets), keep sending your cold e-mails until you get a positive response.
There are so many tools out there for you to do the research independently nowadays, all you need is passion, a lot of time, and a little bit of money. Hey, Einstein figured out his theory of relativity in his patent shop without computers, Internet, Google, Stack Exchange, etc. etc..
Two more things I would like to add. The recent wave of progress is leaving a lot of "old school" researchers behind so you may not get a warm welcome when you cut a bunch of corners with your state-of-the-art tech and get their job with a higher salary just by punching a few keys on a keyboard and clicking some links. Another thing is, a lot of people are doing the same thing. People from South America to Europe, to Africa, to India, to Asia all of a sudden have all these tools to do research that for centuries was only accessible to the western elite. State-of-the-art doesn't stay state-of-the-art for too long so you got to keep up with it or you will be swept aside by the same force that you exploited on your way up.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.472725 | 2016-08-05T01:11:19 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/74749",
"authors": [
"Ac Installation Services",
"Ado Na'Iya Idris",
"FixPhone",
"HASAN ALKAN",
"JeffE",
"Katrina Philip",
"Ken",
"Lori Price",
"Nicotinamide",
"Patricia Shanahan",
"Pritthijit Biswas",
"Sam Aina",
"Sam Al-Aghbari",
"Wrzlprmft",
"abhishek kumar",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10220",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209306",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209307",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209308",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209343",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209372",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209373",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209379",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209380",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209382",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209389",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209395",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209439",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209516",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45035",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"malavika manoj",
"paul garrett",
"user209306"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
80254 | Presenting and disseminating research results before submitting a paper
I got a PhD in math in another country years ago. Recently I moved to the US and have a tenured position. Assume I wrote a paper and want to publish it in a journal. Is it considered OK to present the work and/or post an electronic copy on arXiv, before submitting the paper to a journal? In particular, does it matter in what order I do the following things?
1) Present the work in a seminar at my department.
2) Present the work in a conference in my field.
3) Present the work in a seminar at another department.
4) Post the paper on the electronic arXiv.
5) I submit the paper to a journal.
In some (mostly STEM fields), conferences serve as publication outlets. In others (mostly humanities and social sciences), conferences serve more to facilitate networking and to gather feedback on a draft before preparing the actual publication. The sequences thus depends on your field.
Overall, I don't think there are much such rules; but I am not in the US, so my expertise is limited.
I personally refrain from presenting a work in seminars (in other department notably) or conferences before it is on the arXiv. The deposit is indeed the moment I have checked everything, and I am confident it holds together. Before that, I may have doubts.
In rare occasion, the preprint takes some time to be finished, or deposited, and I am still confident enough to present it, but it is very rare.
I usually put it on the arXiv before submission, because it is a time stamp and I want my work to be available. Referees rarely check proofs in detail, so you need to make yourself confident about your work anyway. You should however remember to update the preprint to a so-called postprint when the referee reports come in (note that some publishers inexplicably don't allow that, OUP for example).
Another reason to deposit on the arXiv before submission is that Elsevier allows you to update a preprint to a postprint, but is quite unclear whether you have the right to deposit a postprint or preprint for the first time after acceptance. Well, not that I particularly urge anyone to publish with Elsevier, but that is to be known.
Putting your work on arXiv also makes it clear that you post a preprint there, which may be relevant from legal standpoint. While embargo on posting postprints in repositories is not that rare, forbidding preprint publication is very unusual in mathematics.
@tomasz: actually, I think that the policy to allow the preprint to be posted but not the postprint is extremely wrong, and in fact unethical. It means that some people will have access to unreliable papers that are known to need correction. It may seem harmless in math (which it is not from a mathematical point of view), but imagine a preprint of a medicine paper whose claims have been asked to be moderated by the referee: that is a big issue.
I think forbidding either of them is unethical, although I don't think your argument is valid. In the cases I know, if you post a preprint (whether or not you post a postprint with it), you are obliged to attach a journal reference to the paper on arXiv after publication. In general, if you go to "production phase" (whether in an industrial context, or figuratively when citing theorem numbers in your next paper), you should rely on the peer-reviewed (journal) version anyway.
@tomasz: my last take on the matter "you should rely on the peer-reviewed (journal) version anyway": not anyone as(legal) access to it, and no one has (legal) access to all published paper.
Everyone has legal access to them, they just need to pay the 40$ or something per paper. ;-) Or you can just e-mail one of the authors.
Of course, it would be better if they were all published in open access, but unfortunately, it seems far off for now.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.474251 | 2016-11-22T10:42:23 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/80254",
"authors": [
"Benoît Kloeckner",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26631",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/946",
"tomasz"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
49531 | Do UK universities have a special obligation to advertise jobs externally?
I often hear it said that all jobs have to be advertised externally before anyone can be appointed to an academic post in a UK university. However, this rule about having to advertise externally is certainly not true in general in industry where the only obligation one might have to avoid discrimination claims is to advertise the job internally.
Is there a special obligation on a UK university through some public sector regulations, maybe, to advertise all jobs externally? I'm asking about UK universities in particular.
I don't know about the UK, but in the US this is often the case. It can make for very frustrating interactions when people apply for a position that is de facto already earmarked for a particular candidate.
@jakebeal Is there a specific law that relates to universities in the US in this regard that doesn't apply to purely commercial enterprises?
There is also an interesting twist where the person has previously been doing the same job but on a fixed term contract. It's not clear to me if a new position is created (which might require advertising) if they are then made permanent.
@Lembik See Bill Barth's answer for an example. It will vary state to state, however.
Even when not required by law, many institutions adopt this requirement as a matter of internal policy, which may require high-level approval to waive.
@NateEldredge My suspicion is that you have hit the nail on the head but I am interested if there might be some public sector regulation which actually requires jobs to be advertised externally.
In the United States, at least, there are also very specific federal requirements about public posting of jobs if the person being hired will need a work visa such as an H-1B visa.
Yes, and sometimes to prevent things like nepotism, etc....
In which country? You're asking about public sector regulations, so the answer is going to be very different for different countries. As such, the question currently seems too broad. I suggest that you edit the question to scope it more narrowly by specifying a particular jurisdiction that you care about.
Most French universities have actually a non-internal recruitment policy. More or less enforced depending on the field and the particular department.
@D.W. My question is about the UK (see the question itself and the tag "united kingdom").
In Germany public state-financed universities (AFAIK any other public authority too) have to publish job offers externally. (there exist some exceptions for religious institutions, they fall under different laws)
Marshall, thank you for the clarification. In the future, you should include that in the question, as it's easy to overlook, otherwise. (And as you can see from some of the answers, some respondents didn't seem to realize this.) I've edited the question for you this time, but just letting you know for the future. Thank you!
I think you are misunderstanding how academic job searches work in the UK. All jobs, and I believe this is not specific to universities, must be advertised internally first to individuals in the "redundancy pool". If, and only if, there is no one in the redundancy pool that can meet the minimum requirements with 6 months of training can the job be advertised externally. The redundency pool is available to people, I think, from 3 months before their contract ends until 3 months afterwards.
Current employees not in the redundancy pool, can get prompted within the same job family without having to advertise the job at all. At my university there is no system for moves, lateral or upwards, across job families. That said, if you really want someone, you can regrade and reclassify them.
Is it the same for state and public universities?
Thank you for this. I understand about the redundancy pool and how it works. As an example of my question, consider a lecturer on a fixed term contract who is more than 3 months from the end of their contract. Is the university legally entitled to simply give them a permanent position or do they really have to advertise it externally under some law or regulation?
@MassimoOrtolano in the UK there are really only public universities. I m not sure about the few private univeraities, but I think the redundancy pool is an EU thing.
@MassimoOrtolano The laws around redundancy that StrongBad refers to are part of UK national statute. They are the same for private and public universities.
@marshall I believe after 4 years on a fixed term contract in the same job you become permanent. When my department wants to convert someone from fixed to permanent we just extend the fixed term contract past the 4 year mark.
@StrongBad My understanding is that some UK universities get round this by claiming that when the specifically allocated funding for the fixed term post has run out then there is a legitimate redundancy.
@marshall just because a job is permanent does not mean they cannot make you redundant. I am not sure where you are going with this. If you have a new question you should ask it as a new question.
@StrongBad Sorry for any confusion (and you are right there is another good related question to ask here). I just meant that some UK universities don't interpret extending a contract beyond 4 years as making any practical difference at all. You acquire unfair dismissal rights after 2 years after all so you have to go through a redundancy process either way.
@marshall Aberdeen University tried this and lost their case at an employment tribunal. You can read about it here: http://www.xperthr.co.uk/editors-choice/university-researcher-on-three-successive-fixed-term-contracts-declared-permanent-employee/104490/
Yes, in my state (Texas), there's a law that all government vacancies in positions (including jobs at state-run, public universities) must be posted publicly for at least 10 business days unless the position is to be filled by an internal candidate. It is often flouted openly.
This seems the opposite of what the OP is asking about. He is claiming that even if the positions will be filled with an internal candidate, that you still need to post it publically.
Yes that is right. UK universities seem to claim that they have to advertise all jobs externally (except for the rule about people in the redundancy pool pointed out by StrongBad). I just found http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/aug/01/academics-anonymous-advertising-research-posts-waste-of-time which does say "Yes, this whole situation comes down to fairness and having an open competition so that the best candidate gets the job. Universities are not legally obliged to advertise posts externally, but most choose to do so."
In addition, the question is apparently asking specifically about UK universities, so Texas laws aren't relevant to the question -- in other words, this doesn't answer the question. (I realize that the original version was a bit unclear, but the original version was also probably too broad for that same reason.)
It depends on the country, state or the university. Some university have their own policy. Some country or state may also have some rules about whether a university should advertise jobs externally. If you are not sure, you may contact someone from a given university to know how it works there.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.474588 | 2015-07-28T16:24:49 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/49531",
"authors": [
"André Kleinschmidt",
"D.W.",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Matthew Towers",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Oswald Veblen",
"Raydot",
"Simd",
"StrongBad",
"Taladris",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13535",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15528",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16122",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22733",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2686",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36613",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37764",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37765",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/705",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"jakebeal",
"marshall"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
59109 | When does self-citation become citation padding?
While reviewing an article recently, I noticed that a substantial fraction of the papers cited by the authors came from their own research work. While some amount of self-citation is appropriate (and usually necessary) to provide an indication of what one has done in a field, in this paper, it felt that the authors went further than that: equations were given four citations from the authors' works, rather than simply indicating the one or two that derived the original result, and so on. (Notably, all the self-citations were in methodology and results, rather than the introduction.)
My question is to ask if there are any publishers or journals that have established standards for what is considered unacceptable levels of self-citation? [Note that this is different from this question, which asks if self-citation is acceptable at all.
Also related: How to discourage irrelevant self-citation?
"While some amount of self-citation is appropriate (and usually necessary) to provide an indication of what one has done in a field [...]"
This is not the purpose of citations in your typical paper. The purpose of citations is, for the most part, to refer the reader to relevant prior art. If a citation is not relevant to understand the paper's contribution or to put the contribution in context (e.g., how this contribution differs from prior art), I'd say it's approaching padding territory.
Surely the guidelines on self-citation are the same as any other citation - is it important/relevant? Is the result/method needed for this paper? I have a friend who said a reviewer suggested he add to his already fairly long list of self-references, because it was highly relevant.
I think it's certainly within the reviewer's rights to point out unnecessary references. If I thought the paper were otherwise acceptable, I might discuss the padding issues with the editor before submitting my report.
I think this is easier to think about if we drop the "self" qualification.
When does citation become citation padding?
After all, people will also gratuitously cite colleagues ("I'll scratch your back so you'll hopefully also scratch mine") or likely reviewers. And I'd say that the criteria for self-citations should not be any different than for other-citation. Why should they?
That said, I stumbled over this part of the question:
some amount of self-citation is appropriate (and usually necessary) to provide an indication of what one has done in a field
As José comments, this is incorrect. A citation is not there to show what someone (the author himself or someone else) has done in a field. It's there to give context to the new work, to show what has already been done and how the new work relates to prior art. The causal arrow goes from the work to the author, not the other way around.
(Of course, this is contingent on this question being about an article. In a grant application, you need to self-cite to establish that you know what you are talking about. And if you are writing an editorial to celebrate Professor X's fifty years in a field, you will of course cite his work to show what he has done over his career.)
So the question should be: does this citation provide relevant context to the new work? Who the cited authors are should ideally be immaterial. In your example, it would probably make sense to cite the original derivation of the results. And possibly other applications of such results that were similar to the new applications reported on in the present paper, similar enough to be helpful to the reader.
The problem is of course that "relevant" is subjective, field- and situation-dependent. One field may require a lot more context to make sense of a new piece of work than another one. A review article written in a general interest journal will need more background than a submission to a highly specialized journal whose readership can reasonably be assumed to already have a lot of background. And even then, one reviewer may prefer you to give more background, the other to focus on the closest related work.
And all of these factors apply equally well to self-citations and to other-citations. You will usually work in one direction across multiple publications, after all, and so your previous publications will often indeed be relevant for later ones... just as previous publications of people you collaborate with (because you collaborate with people with similar research interests) and of likely reviewers (because reviewers of course should have worked in this field - otherwise, why have them as reviewers?). So a somewhat higher proportion of self-citations, collaborator-citations and likely-reviewer-citations than of other-citations are to be expected, even without any conscious padding going on.
Reviewers and editors will need to make choices and draw lines to curb excesses, in line with the field's and the journal's conventions and expectations. In case of doubt, you can always ask the author to clarify the relationship of the reference to Foo & Bar (2015) to the present work, or to "consider removing the reference in the interest of brevity".
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.475215 | 2015-11-30T03:13:17 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/59109",
"authors": [
"Jessica B",
"John",
"Kimball",
"Mr Lolo",
"cutepretzel",
"ff524",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163061",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163062",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163063",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163313",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44978",
"profmartinez",
"yiyun sheng"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
5109 | Is it accepted to cite an entire issue of a journal?
There exist review journals that every now and then publish a thematic issue on a given topic. For example, Chemical Reviews does so: one thematic issue (see e.g. this one) includes an editorial and a number of invited review on the main topic.
When writing the introduction of a research paper, one can start by summing up the recent developments in the field, and then explain the reasoning behind the paper being written (“People have looked at application of molecules X and Y to reactions A, B and C, but so far noöne has evidenced any benefit of using them for reaction D. We here show that they lead to a spectacular 270% improvement over current yields”). When writing the broader part of the introduction, one might be tempted to include many references to recent reviews on the topic. However, when many reviews come from the same thematic issue of a journal, it becomes a bit ridiculous. So…
Is it an accepted practice to include a reference to an entire issue of a journal?
Special issue of Chem. Rev. on “Giant molecules for catalysis”, 2010, issue 8.
Alternatively, is it adequate to cite the editorial of the thematic issue? Or do individual papers need to be cited, at the risk of making a long string of citations? Like so:
Lots of research has focused on applications of these molecules to A[1], B[2], C[3], D[4], E[5] and F[6]
where refs. 1-6 are all to sequential papers in the same issue of the same journal.
I expect the answer will have more to do with the policies of individual journals. I have wanted to do what you suggest (and especially with Chem Rev), but have had to choose articles, either the one or two reviews most relevant to my work, or occasionally the editorial if I want to show a growing trend in the field.
I, for one, would not allow such thing to pass the Copy Editorial stage of publication.
It seems tempting to cite only the issue of a journal when it contains several articles that you want to refer to from your introduction. Especially so if it is a special issue directly related to your paper. As to your question whether it is an accepted practice, I haven't seen so, but it could depend on the field of research of course.
Personally, I would advise against using such citations for two main reasons:
You should always try to cite as specific as possible. If you support a stated fact with a citation, the reader should be directed to this fact as directly as possible. In your example of the giant molecules, a reader may be more interested in application A than in giant molecules in general, so it will be helpful if you cite more specifically.
Citations are the basis for many measures of academic impact, and I doubt that citations to journal issues are counted in these measures. The authors of the articles that you intend to cite with a reference to a whole journal issue will certainly not be pleased with this, because you restrain a source of academic reputation for them.
As a side note: I think the bibliometric indicators currently used (number of citations, impact factor, etc.) are definitely ill-conceived when it comes to review articles. Such reviews, by the very nature, attract a lot of citations and gain an unhealthy weight in an individual’s scientific production.
On the other hand, if the 'stated fact' is something like "topic X has continued to attract interest", and the citation to support it is a "Topical review of X", then the broad citation could be warranted.
As has been indicated from other answers, it is generally not acceptable, or a good idea. When you reference materials you need to specific so that the reader cane trace your sources. There is, however, one exception that I can think of and it concerns thematic or special issues.
As you say, some journals issue issues devoted to papers adhering to specific topic or theme. This can be a set of invited papers around a specific question, or a selection of papers coming out from a workshop or symposia session. Often such issues are tied together by an editorial explaining the theme and the contributions of the individual papers to that theme.
It is possible to reference such issues rather than the individual papers if the issue can be seen as contributing a collective view. This can, for example, be a state of the art view of the topic. The point is that the issue becomes similar to, for example, an edited book rather than individual papers and the referencing concerns the collective contribution of papers, not the individual. As soon as something needs to be sourced from a paper within the issue the paper needs to be referenced, the issue reference is then not sufficient.
So it is possible to reference entire journal issues but only for very specific (or actually general) purposes, not to replace referencing a bunch of individual paper from which ideas have been gained. This makes the use quite limited and pointing at a source for information rather than the information itself.
Citations along the lines of see X for a review are meaningless in my opinion and should be avoided. I believe, you should only be citing novel and specific findings. I would even steer away from citing the individual articles in a special issue because they tend to rehash old material and you are better off citing the original source.
When you cite a single fact or finding, there usually is a single identifiable source. Otherwise, for citations like “yields in reaction X have improved dramatically over the last 5 years due to the incremental improvement of synthesis conditions”, it is hard to imagine citing one non-review paper. I do agree with you that it is tempting to avoid citations at all in broad introductions, but that is unfortunately not the opinion of the majority (in my field at least).
@F'x in your case the review paper is doing a meta-analysis (possibly/probably informal) and providing a novel and specific finding. Collections of papers/chapters with no synthesis do not provide that type of meta analysis.
I don't understand this sentiment. If I'm reading the paper and am not very familiar with the field, being pointed to a good review paper is helpful; and if I don't care about the background I'm grateful that the review is a citation I can skip. Moreover, if the author were to read a review paper, extract all the references, and then cite those without citing the review, it would be intellectually dishonest. I'm struggling to see any downside at all to citing reviews directly.
I appreciate that my answer is on the extreme side, but the down votes seem a little harsh. You might disagree, but is it clearly and possibly dangerously wrong?
@DanielE.Shub: “clearly wrong”, no — but it’s a provocative and debatable point which (clearly from comments) many people strongly disagree with you on. // For my part, I believe that citations serve multiple purposes — not only to attribute credit to authors, but also to direct readers to relevant background. Review citations are not important for the former purpose, but they can be very good for the latter.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.475641 | 2012-11-02T10:22:19 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5109",
"authors": [
"Akavall",
"Alf Eaton",
"Ben Ernest",
"Ben Norris",
"Bonsaigin",
"E.P.",
"F'x",
"N. Virgo",
"PLL",
"Ruben de Best",
"StrongBad",
"WDot",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1277",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13088",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13089",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13090",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13108",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13114",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1471",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1534",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41159",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41160",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/820",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/924",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"userX",
"yo'"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
12674 | How many co-authors are enough?
I am doing research in an industrial organization. Now, I have written a paper describing my work and outcomes. The idea was completely envisaged by me and the paper was written solely be me. It was an outcome of a funded research project, but the research done was no where in the scope of the work, and I managed to squeeze time to do this work.
Now, I am confused on whom to include in my co-authors lists.
I have only one teammate, with whom I worked in the project but didn't take any help for doing this area of work and writing the paper. But I think he deserves to be a co-author since we discussed various related things.
I also gave the paper for review to my reporting officer who gave a few grammatical suggestions and tips on paper writing.
Now, the problem is, I have two more level of hierarchy above my reporting officer one of them being the director of the organization. Would it be ethical to include their names as co-authors when no discussion was made with them regarding this or should they be acknowledged ?
Note: The usual practice in my organization is to keep your superiors name before yourself(some red tapism probably), and I have already violated that by keeping myself as first author(thanks to ASE).
People who have made no intellectual or scientific contribution to a paper should not be listed as authors. So, unless your upper-level supervisors have had an active role in designing the project, carrying it out, or writing the papers, they should be excluded. This is the practice normally carried out in corporate environments.
Regarding your teammate, it seems that you had exchange of ideas with him, and it is up to you to consider whether that consists of a scientific contribution to the final paper. Regarding your reporting officer, the description your currently have (“a few grammatical suggestions and tips on paper writing”) do not sound like significant scientific contributions (which
is the commonly-used threshold for authorship determination; check with the journal or publisher's guidelines for your specific case). Your hierarchy, well, this doesn't sound like they contributed at all.
That being said, there is real life to consider, your organization's policies and customs, and your own contract. In a way, it might actually be easier for you not to have your teammate as co-author, in which case it is clear that the paper is yours (while the outcome of the work itself was the company's).
The guide lines suggested by the vancuver Protocol lists what should be the norm. It is evident that not everyoone abides by this protol and in some cases deviations may be fine. Take some time to study the protocol (the one linked or some other version) and make your mind up how you should abide. It is not always easy to know who to include and excluding peoplemay be evenharder because of a variety of reasons from personal to financial. The protocol at least provides a platform against which any such decision can be judged.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.476224 | 2013-09-14T15:27:16 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12674",
"authors": [
"Femi Ogunmokun",
"Karthik Rana",
"Prohibited",
"afrendeiro",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32100",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32103",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32104"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
23509 | Real co-first authors?
I notice that in the physics field, there are sometimes co-first authors, both names being followed by a footnote saying "These two authors contribute equally."
Even though explicitly labeled as so, one name still comes before the other. Also, as far as I know, the one believed to contribute a little bit more goes first. Hence, these are actually not real co-first authors.
Imagine in some journal with an author-title header on every page. The name of FirstAuthorB, the co-first author who comes after FirstAuthorA, will not be shown, as in
FirstAuthorA et al.: Paper Title
So is there some other generally accepted ways to truly display two first authors as completely equal?
Within normal procedures the best way would be to list the two first authors in alphabetical order and then make a statement in the acknowledgement that the two have contributed equally. In this we assume that the way authorship is distributed in falling order. Many journals now also ask for a specification of contributorship of all authors to distinguish who has done what. One oddity I cam across was a paper by K & H (last name initials) where it was listed in the acknowledgement that both had contributed equally. In this case H was the PhD student of K and so K may have wanted the primary spot to get the full impact of the prestigious publication.
So the way to signal contributions by ordering authors is not without its problems. But, most of the problems come from the fact that first authorship is used without discretion to assign merit. So from this perspective it is a result of a flawed system. Attributing contributorship can even out the playing field to some extent but basically we will have to live with the systems. One should also remember that the most important aspect of the reference for most is the sourcing of information, not who did what. So an example of how a system built for one purpose has been adopted to solve another.
In this case H was the PhD student of K and so K may have wanted the primary spot — Bad advisor. No donut.
There are two distinct issues with "first" authors:
Tenure committees and others doing a detailed review of an author's record may use the author order (in appropriate disciplines) to determine how much weight to give to each paper. In detailed review settings such as this, a published statement "these authors contributed equally" has value, because the tenure or review committee can see that the order of authors did not reflect relative contributions. Of course, in other fields the authors are alphabetical by convention, so the order is irrelevant.
There is also an "accidental" benefit to being the first author, which a published statement on the contributions of each author does not help. Because citations are often abbreviated, many papers are cited by the name of their first author, and thus this author gains prestige. This happens even in fields where the citations are strictly alphabetical and do not reflect the relative contribution of each author! There is published research showing that there is a bias towards researchers whose last name starts with a letter early in the alphabet (i.e. among accomplished researchers there are more with early initials than would be expected by mere chance).
So a statement about the relative contributions of each author will only help in particular circumstances.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.476599 | 2014-06-17T14:07:39 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23509",
"authors": [
"Benjamin S. Leveritt",
"Cletus Ajibade",
"Felipe A",
"Fiery Phoenix",
"JeffE",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62874",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62878",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62879",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62888",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62896",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"user6929543"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
201703 | Status of the GRE exams for PhD programs in mathematics in 2023
I am writing to ask if there is any consensus on the role of (i) the GRE General Exam and (ii) the GRE Mathematics Subject exam in the PhD admissions process for Mathematics Departments in the United States...and I want information specific for 2023.
Some context: I spent many years involved with graduate admissions in my department (Mathematics at the University of Georgia) and was Graduate Coordinator (the faculty member most closely involved in graduate admissions) from 2016 through 2019. At that time, most top 100 PhD programs required one or both of these exams, so I advised any prospective mathematics graduate student to take them.
As of this semester I took a role as an advisor to (many) undergraduate students in our department, and I will be giving a workshop on Graduate School in mathematics. I know that following the COVID19 pandemic my own department no longer requires either GRE exam (nor does it seem to be much used anymore in our admissions process). I am currently in the process of looking up what is happening with other schools. From what I have found so far, the most common status is "Not required but can be submitted" followed by "Not required but recommended." This makes me wonder what is the role of the GRE for contemporary students applying to graduate school in mathematics. If you are involved in graduate admissions from the other side, would you advise prospective students to take one or both exams? Why?
Added: Here is one example of something I found that seems to be staking out a rather subtle position:
GRE Mathematics subject scores are not strictly required for the application. You may submit unofficial scores if you wish. Omission of the GRE test score will not negatively affect your application.
Hi Pete, I haven't done grad admissions in awhile either, but I think the main role of GRE then was (1) weeding out really weak students, or (2) showing students (often foreign) from unknown places have at least a reasonable background. I don't think this aspect would have changed. So for students with good grades from UGA my guess is it'd only be helpful if some places they're considering applying to either require or recommend Math GRE.
@Kimball: Thanks for your reply. My thought at the moment is also that these scores would be more helpful for applicants coming from places other than a nationally known large state university, namely (i) foreign countries and (ii) smaller regional institutions where it is hard to know how their very strong students compare to students elsewhere.
In the US there was never a "consensus" about the GRE in the sense of universities getting together and making a joint decision. What there is, though, is a legal "fairness" requirement that must be met. The GRE seemed at the time like a good way to help ensure that, but there is no requirement that the standard be met in that particular way. Each university is free to make its own rules within the law.
No idea about the general pattern, but at U of MN in math we do not currently look at GRE scores. This may change in the future, due to many faculty members' enthusiasm for single numbers that supposedly adequately reflect mathematical potential. The Dir Grad Studies for several years (Dick McGehee: he deserves credit for all his efforts!) and I had realized many years ago that the GRE really tests for lots of things that are not what what we want to know about... and the pandemic aided us in explicitly disregarding the GRE. But, as I said, this may change... sigh...
There is no consensus.
@paul: Thanks. That was my assessment of the situation so far. I admit that this is not an ideal question for this site, because I really want to hear from several key people how things work at their institutions. Still, I got something out of it already...
RE duplicates: there is this question, but that's a year old already, and neither of the answers to that provides an "on the ground" answer. So, I'm inclined to agree that this post could still be valuable.
@cag51 I think I'm inclined to agree. I'm both interested in this question, but also have some trepidation that it's phrased as a discussion. Pete's self-answer is reasonable in style, but the request in the question for anecdotes feels somewhat out of scope to me.
Pete: Perhaps you've already seen this, I was linked to it I think in a different question. Doesn't precisely answer your question, but maybe it's more data: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hmdO7af3-lLvtJQO-szayG6blTvAYBQ1JcYXFZ_6apE/edit#gid=0
I spent about an hour looking into this question. I looked at the mathematics PhD programs ranked numbers 21 through 61 on the US News and World Report List. I found five that require at least one of these two GREs: Michigan State, Texas A&M, UC Davis, UC Irvine and UMass Amherst.
It was interesting that there was a diversity of language used among the others.
The most common verbiage I found was "no longer required" or "optional." I found only one program that said that the scores would not be considered if sent. Several institutions managed to convey to me (a former graduate admissions chair) a lot of ambivalence about the exam, as in the quote I put into the question. Here is another interesting one:
Both the GRE general exam and the GRE math subject exam are optional. If you feel that your GRE math subject exam score contributes positively to your application, then we encourage you to submit it, and unofficial scores will be provisionally accepted.
Several other programs indicated that GRE scores would only be used to help applicants, not to hurt them, which -- I pause to give respect to a truly difficult situation -- upon scrutiny doesn't seem to make much sense. (This is a highly competitive process. If submitting something can help your application, then how can you ensure those who do not submit are not being hurt?)
I also saw language saying that these requirements were "waived for 2023" or "suspended in 2023," indicating that many institutions are openly unsure of what they will do in the longer run.
Taking all this into account, it is hard to make a clear, uniform recommendation to prospective students. (Compare to five years ago, when I recommended that all prospective students take the GRE. Without the GRE they would have been unable to apply to at least two thirds of the programs.) I do think that there are some good test-takers out there whose strong scores would help their applications, especially if they are coming from programs whose overall academic standard will not be known by admissions committees and/or for which the recommendations of the local faculty may carry less weight. But it is hard for me to broadly recommendthis time-consuming, expensive exam that most schools say they won't hold against you if you don't take.
It's been interesting to see how quickly university stances on the GRE have changed as a result of COVID era policies. My university doesn't have a math major, but we have some incredibly bright and gifted students. I've suggested to them that they take the GRE to better position themselves by demonstrating that they have the requisite knowledge.
When I see language like "GRE scores would only be used to help applicants", I always understood it to mean that good GRE scores would be used to help applicants that submitted them, and be ignored otherwise (so applications with bad GRE scores == applications without any GRE scores at all) ... essentially meaning that submitting a score, good or not, won't hurt your application. Whether it would hurt somebody else's application, ah well, ...
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.476909 | 2023-09-11T17:41:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/201703",
"authors": [
"Buffy",
"Cameron Williams",
"Kimball",
"Moishe Kohan",
"Pete L. Clark",
"cag51",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/176372",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46577",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/61756",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"muru",
"paul garrett",
"user176372"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
72471 | How I can efficiently use Google Scholar to find prior research on a topic?
For starting a new problem I generally need to look for work already published through Google Scholar. For example, recently I came across an equation, the Pochhammer-Chree equation. When I type this equation name in the Google Scholar tab, a large number of publications on this equations piles up. It is not possible to look for every single publication to check what type of work has already been done on this equation.
Let me elaborate a little more. Suppose I need to check if the Lie symmetry analysis on this equation has been carried out or not. Then I have certain options in advanced search, that to include the words symmetry or symmetry analysis in the title, abstract or in the whole article along with the word Pochhammer-Chree. Here of course the time range can also be given. Unfortunately, even by this type of search I can miss some of the article that have been already published on symmetry analysis of Pochhammer-Chree.
Is my way of search correct? If not, how should I search through the web by not missing a single article on the topic I am looking for?
It is not totally clear to me what's the actual question here. In the title it seems like you are searching some specific article. The question body seems to indicate that you would only like to find any work that could be relevant. It may also be that you want to ask "How can I find out if something has already been treated?". Please clarify.
See How to do a literature search
@D.W. Is there a similar question on Academia.SE? That one is specific (with specific journals) to the cryptography field.
@J.Roibal, not that I know of. Feel free to ask such a question here, if you'd like to see a similar answer here. However, my answer there is not at all specific to cryptography. The main elements remain the same in any other field -- I would make only extermely small changes for non-cryptographers ( remove recommendations to look at IACR or Crypto.SE; those are the only crypto-specific parts of my answer).
related: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30719/how-to-build-a-list-of-seminal-papers-in-a-field/30725#30725
Just to elaborate on what the other posters have mentioned: your first
job is to find at least one paper that is very relevant to the
specific topic that you are interested in, e.g. symmetry analysis of
Pochhammer-Chree equations. Possibly just searching on Google Scholar
and browsing the results is your best option here. The number of
citations that a specific paper has is an indication of whether that
paper was important/influential within your field (i.e., these are the
papers your reviewers will know about), so you should make sure to
study these papers in particular. Once you have a good reference
paper, you can use Google Scholar to click on the blue 'Cited by ##'
hyperlink that is on the bottom left of every search result on
Scholar. You can use this to find other relevant papers going forward
in time. As you collect relevant papers, you can also look at their
references (and read the 'related work' sections of the paper) and
find other papers that you may have missed.
In most cases, it is impossible to 'not miss a single article' on the
topic that you are looking for, and I don't believe this is a useful
goal anyways. Of course, in some fields, a result may be binary:
either you have proven/shown something or you have not, and once it's
done, there is no point doing it again. But in most fields, if two
people independently pursue the same topic, they will approach it in
different ways, and confirming each other's findings in this way
provides a lot of value. When your paper is reviewed, it is essential
that you demonstrate an intellectual heritage to your work - that you
care about prior work, and have used it to guide you, and you are
building on a tradition. If you miss something, the reviewers will be
happy to point it out, and in my experience this is rarely the reason
a paper gets rejected. And even if a paper is rejected for inadequate
understanding of prior work, this is an easy problem to fix for
resubmission elsewhere.
So in summary: you can only do your best. The process outlined above
is the process used by most people these days. If you follow this
approach, and put in the proper amount of effort, then if you miss
something anyways, I don't think anyone will hold it against you (and
most likely no one, including you, will ever know).
I think the key takeaway is that in research, it is far more likely that you will need to read many papers over weeks or months to get a feel for the state and texture of human knowledge in an area. It is very unlikely that one paper was written that answers your question specifically, even if you had the perfect search string, and fills in just the gaps you need filled. Expect to invest substantial time and intellectual effort.
It is true; there are too many papers out there to even read the abstracts of all of them. That is why many research papers contain phrases like "to the best of our knowledge", etc.
My approach to minimize the risk of missing out publications is as follows: I start with reading review papers. These will sum up the research up to a certain point and will show you what the seminal papers in the field are. Then I look up the latest papers that cite the reviews and/or the seminal papers. This approach works very well with Google Scholar.
IMO, the phrase "to the best of our knowledge" should be acronym-ify as "TTBOOK" for short.
Isn't it better to simply assume that the authors looked back in time "to the best of their abilities"? If someone wants to correct them, they can correct them directly.
@ooker - this acronym does not sound common at all to me so I do not see the need to change it in the post
@magnon2020 I just try to have some fun here...
One trick that I find useful, when researching an area that I'm relatively new to, is to sort by the number of citations. Among the top-cited papers from the search will often be the original paper that introduced a concept, and/or a useful review article. Both of those provide excellent starting points to follow citations forwards and backwards through time. If neither of those appear, then out of the top few papers, pick the one with the most relevant sounding title, and with any luck it will, at the very least, provide references within the text that will form a useful starting point.
The search feature on Google Scholar is a fantastic starting point to begin your research, but there are also other methods which can be used with Google to provide highly relevant results.
Once you have found a paper in your general topic and have determined to be of high-value (usually the first result in Google Scholar Search) you can then view which articles cite this article, and which articles are cited by this article. That is a fantastic way to develop an interconnected web following the same line of thought through time. You can learn who researched what when, and what advancements were made to that theory or reasoning and how long each development took.
For Example, when searching google scholar for "CRISPR Cas9" (A new methodology for genetic engineering) A number of results is displayed, and underneath each result, statistics are available. Under the first result, it says "Cited By 850", by clicking this link, you are able to see what recent publications on the topic are covering. These can also be sorted by citations, date published, authors, etc. This is one of the most effective methods for performing google scholar searches and finding relevant information.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.477532 | 2016-07-08T09:20:50 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/72471",
"authors": [
"Aaron Hall",
"Adrien Tondo",
"Ashutosh Mishra",
"Audia Nur Safarah",
"Becca Jom",
"D.W.",
"Dirk",
"Elham Nematolahi",
"Ghada tarek",
"J. Roibal - BlockchainEng",
"Jemuel Chandrakumaran",
"Ludmila Kasatkina",
"Nica Garcia",
"Ooker",
"Preet Gill",
"Rupesh kumar",
"Sidney Duggins",
"Utkarsh Sinha",
"behzad khedri",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14899",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204020",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204021",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204022",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204034",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204035",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204067",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204072",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204073",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204083",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204087",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204088",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204089",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43315",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47985",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/529",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57755",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/705",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9518",
"magnon2020",
"mightypile"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
72636 | What did a good academic job market for mathematicians look like and could it ever come back?
I'm about to enter a math PhD program at a pretty good school, but the job market for research university professors has been terrible as far as I can remember (since the late 2000s recession). I hear many stories of hundreds of excellent candidates applying for one or two openings.
Older professors tell me it wasn't always like this. What did the market look like when it was considered "good" and could it ever come back by the time I finish in 5-6 years? Or has there been a fundamental shift in academia preventing the good times as we knew it from ever returning?
Yes, the job market nowadays is not what it once was. On the other hand, if you like spending your days doing math, and don't care about getting rich, academic math is not the stupidest gamble, in the sense that, in the worst-case scenario, you have to get "a real job like everybody else". But, yes, "academic math" is not a "career choice", but more a way of converting a hobby/obsession into something that pays a bit, usually with health insurance.
And if you have a PhD in math, you should be able to find a fairly interesting "real job" more easily than looking for one with just a bachelor's degree.
@PeterShor - It obviously depends on your bachelor's degree and what you learned, and on what you mean by "interesting". I can say my pre-grad school salary was, up to rounding error, the same as my current salary, and that's without accounting for 15+ years of (admittedly low) inflation. I'm glad I made the decisions I did, but from a purely financial point of view...
I wonder how closely this relates to the computer industry job market. Pure speculation, but could it be that people are transitioning into software engineering and the like from "pure math," which almost by definition is unmarketable? (That is, if you define "pure" as "not applied to real-world or business problems.") The computer industry job market isn't hurting that I can tell.
Maybe in the past, with scarcity of mathematicians, they could follow their passion and find a job. Now you kind of have to find what will be in demand in the futur (big data, ai, ...) and find your passion in that. You need to be a bit smarter in the type of research you'll be doing.
@Wildcard: I think many (U.S. domestic) computer engineers might disagree with you. I constantly see stories of people training H1-B visa holders to replace them, inability to get hired after age 45 or so, etc.
@DanielR.Collins - There are a lot of "software engineers" out there who, after many years of experience, sadly still don't have the ability to read (decently written) code and abstractly reason about what the code is doing without actually testing it and stepping through each variable. These are the people who can't find jobs at age 45. I would hope most people even contemplating math grad school won't have this problem.
@AlexanderWoo: On the contrary, ageism is a fairly well-documented point of bias in the software engineering trade, even for talented people: https://newrepublic.com/article/117088/silicons-valleys-brutal-ageism
@paulgarrett I'm probably missing the point of your last sentence. Do you mean that "something that pays a bit, usually with health insurance" is not a career?
@JiK, of course it depends what one means by "career". To my perception, the still-viable version of academic mathematics (which is what many of us always thought in terms of) is more like a hobby/obsession that quasi-miraculously pays modest bills, etc. Not a thing to pursue "as a job", since one would have to put more effort into it than is rewarded in any obvious way, etc. Not a "rational" choice, in many ways, even during the Cold War. E.g., if a person did not like math an awful lot, and needed lots of money, math was always a pretty dubious choice.
First, some historical perspective: Francis Sowerby Macaulay and Hermann Schubert, two mathematicians from the late 19th century whose names you still hear repeatedly these days if you come anywhere near algebraic geometry, both taught high school.
Second, a counting perspective: Research university professors probably average a doctoral student at least every five years, with some averaging more than one a year. This means every professor produces somewhere between 6 to 40 replacements over the course of their career. Assuming no change in the number of jobs, only one of those replacements will get a research university professorship.
Third, a practical perspective: It's hard to imagine research in mathematics, especially but not only pure mathematics, having direct practical benefit to many people. That means the amount of funding purely for research tends to be rather small. Even at research universities, teaching is an important rationale for paying a professor's salary, and the benefits to teaching are an important justification for research.
What happened between the 1950s and 1980s, particularly in the US, was an enormous expansion in higher education along with a massive increase in research funding. The US went from having about 5% of its 20-year-olds going to college to about 50%. Assuming a corresponding increase in the number of professors, this meant a professor could advise 10 PhD students and have every one of them get a job. For obvious reasons, we will never see a 10-fold increase again. Also, the US was enormously wealthy and had resources to spend on less practical purposes like mathematical research and providing high quality university education. (The US still spends about 50% more per university student than Germany. Most of that is going to smaller classes with more attention paid to helping students along.)
I would like to contradict you; lots of research in applied mathematics has direct practical benefit, even if the majority of it doesn't.
"It's hard to imagine research in mathematics ... having direct practical benefit to many people." How about RSA (which is based on number theory)? Or digital circuits (from boolean logic)? Or GPS (those working on non-euclidean geometry didn't think space worked that way)?
@PyRulez - I don't think any of those examples count as "direct".
@AlexanderWoo Whoops, missed a word. Sorry.
A lot of work done by people has little direct practical benefit to people. This is not specific to mathematics. Just don't sum positive numbers to $- {1 \over 12}$. [What??? Does Mathjax not work here?]
'That means the amount of funding purely for research tends to be rather small'. No. It is something specific to our current society that funding for research depends on 'direct practical benefits'. There is plenty of scope for funding things with only indirect practical benefits, or direct philosophical or spiritual benefits, or nebulous indirect impractical benefits, but we choose not to make that decision.
@PyRulez, the problem is perception, not reality. Sure, if you pause to think about it, number theory gives you encryption, statistics gives you quantitative finance and the insurance industry, various branches of calculus give you high-frequency electronics and the semiconductor industry, and so on -- but the point is the applications aren't obvious, unlike something like fluid dynamics.
@PyRulez I think the distinction to be made is one in the present tense, not looking backwards with hindsight. One cannot claim that one's work on number theory is in support of RSA until RSA comes into being (or is part of the development of the algorithm itself). Before that point, it is hard to justify the expenditure of funds using RSA as your rationale. After RSA came out, there was certainly some direct practical benefit coming from beating on the problem and making sure things are secure. One of the great challenges universities and other higher education groups face...
... is trying to convince people to give them enough credit for building the underpinnings of the flashy inventions that people recognize and value. It's a never ending struggle. I've lost the speech, but there was a beautiful speech to congress by either Fenyman or Oppehnehimer which basically stated that they could not name a single practical use for the research they were championing, but that congress should pay for it anyway. Their argument was beautiful.
@CortAmmon - and it's hard to imagine anyone giving the same speech nowadays, or not being laughed out of the room.
What are the "benefits to teaching" of research? I'm curious.
@RenéG 1. People who are also doing research have a more direct connection to the subject and so might be better able to teach it. 2. Paying people to do research as well as teach allows you to attract a better class of teacher.
Compare page 3 of the AMS annual survey from 1999 with page 4 of the 2008 edition and page 4 of the 2014 edition, in terms of employment for new hires we are actually much better currently than the early 90s.
Depending on the age of the individual you talked to: the good old days could be everything up until the late 80s, when rate of unemployment remain largely below 2%, and new graduates are often immediately hired on tenure-track positions. We are almost certainly not going to return to that level of employment: in the post-WWII era through the cold war there have been (for one reason or another, GI Bill for example) expansions in funding for academia. That growth was never sustainable. As a benchmark for the future you probably want to consider the data from 1990 on.
If you look in the 1999 data, of those obtaining employment in the United States, just under 30% (of the new PhD recipients) are hired in postdoc positions and a bit over 50% in permanent positions (30% in academia and the other 20% in industry/government). The 2008 data is similar. The postdoc percentage is higher in 2014 (38%) but not outrageously so.
You can spend some more time teasing out the data yourself; the annual survey results are available online for the past 15 years, and presumably the AMS has the old data dating back to the 50s available somewhere.
If you want to be more forward looking and consider hiring statistics overall instead of just for new PhDs, since the economic crisis the AMS has been running employment surveys every years. A quick glance at the 2014 survey suggests that things have improved slightly.
As a side remark: the large number of applications mathematics positions receive has in some part to do with the availability of MathJobs.org. The website makes applying to 50-100 positions in one hiring cycle relatively easier in mathematics compared to other academic fields without a similar centralized job database. So the inflation of number of applications received per opening compared to "old days" does not 100% correlate to the health of the job market.
Exactly. The GI-Bill-fueled expansion of college populations, and Cold-War-fueled expansion of federal research funding (and rationalizations about teaching loads), has not continued, and would not have made sense to continue. But the general structure and mythologies were/are grounded in that expansionist time... On another hand, in what line of work is everything always easy? The (falsely) "Golden Age" (which was unsustainable and substantially delusional) is over. I must say that I feel lucky to have caught that wave a bit, but even in the best of times academic math required... [cont'd]
[cont'd] ... personal sacrifices, geographic location very significant among them. Especially prior to "internet", leaving family, friends, and maybe working spouses/partners behind... and more than once?
Don't forget the what a powerful force Sputnik was to in re-energizing governmental funding for the physical sciences and engineering in the US. I've talked to people hired in that spurt. Phrase like "a pulse and a Ph.D. or even ABD were enough to get hired" came up more than once. I like to claim that every other physics build on a US campus was built in the aftermath, though that estimate has very wide error bars.
@dmckee, ah, yes, indeed! "Sputnik" created a sort of "carte blanche" situation for physical sciences for a long time, maybe through the 1960s, at least.
So how many applications do mathematics positions in academia typically receive? I'm curious, because I've just applied for one myself.
@Significance It varies significantly between Universities (rank/popularity and if it's research or teaching focused). Some get well over a hundred applications per position, and some (especially smaller liberal arts and/or little state schools) fail their search because they didn't get enough applicants or no one took their offer.
@Significance: I work at a large public research university. Last year we advertised for one position and got over 400 applications. And I've heard of places with even worse ratios.
@Significance: I work at a top-5 math department, and last I heard I believe we got something like 600 postdoc applications. But as you can imagine, the number of serious candidates is much much smaller -- so these statistics, although striking, are ultimately rather uninformative. Most of these applicants are just checking off all the top universities on MathJobs, because after all, why not? (We still read every application, though!)
There are different levels of "good". In 1969, as I was starting my last year in graduate school, a senior professor told me about job-hunting: "Well, you should decide where you want to go and assume that we can get you in there." I'd call that a good job market. But, in my case, it didn't work that way; apparently the greatest effects of the post-Sputnik boom in math had just faded away. So did I encounter a bad job market? By comparison with prior years, yes. But I sent out a total of three applications and got two offers. By comparison with more recent times, that was still an extremely good job market. I see no realistic hope for things to get that good again.
In my opinion, there are two factors that define a "good" job market. One of them is NOT how many people apply for any given position. The number of people applying for a position depends on the number of people graduating, the number of people who want to switch universities, and the number of people who want to switch careers. I believe even in a good job market, you can still get 100s of people applying for positions. I do not believe a "good" job market means that everyone who wants a TT position with a 1-1 teaching load (i.e., 1 class in the fall and 1 in the spring) at an R1. I think a good job market means the "top people" (I don't want to define "top people") eventually get a job.
The first factor that I think defines a "good" job market is the number of positions "good" positions being advertised. I think of a "good" position in the US as a TT position with a teaching load less than 3-3 (i.e., 3 classes in the fall and 3 in the spring). My field is on the small side, so in a bad year, there would be less than 5 positions targeted to my specialty and in a good year 10+. In a good year there might also be another 10+ open calls and another 10 or so calls where if you squint enough you can argue you fit. So in a good year there might be 30 or so "good" positions to apply to and in a bad year less than 10.
The second factor is the number of positions that will help you progress. These could be soft money research positions or poorly paid one year visiting positions with a reasonable teaching load with colleagues that will help you become a better researcher. I do not consider 5-5 adjunct positions as helping you progress. Most of these progression positions, at least in my field, are a direct result of grant funding. They could come about from someone on the job market getting a grant themselves or from a current faculty member getting a grant to buy out of their teaching. In a good job market, there needs to be enough of these that the "top" people can avoid being unemployed and stagnating for a year.
I think this is a nice answer, but some points don't seem to apply to math. I've never heard of a soft-money research position in math, for example.
@TomChurch when I wrote the answer, the question was more general than it is now.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.478210 | 2016-07-11T21:07:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/72636",
"authors": [
"A-1 Hollywood Garage Door",
"Alexander Woo",
"Benita Florentia",
"BrianH",
"Christopher King",
"Cort Ammon",
"Dallas Pinkerton",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"EMAN TAHA",
"JiK",
"Mark",
"Marketing Simplified with Vane",
"Mehak randhawa",
"Paul Proteus",
"Peter Shor ",
"Renate Sturdevant",
"Significance",
"Spammer",
"StrongBad",
"Tom Church",
"Tracey Walls",
"Wildcard",
"Willie Wong",
"Yommine Hjalmarsson",
"copper.hat",
"dgh",
"dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13404",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204600",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204601",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204602",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204606",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204611",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204613",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204614",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204615",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204619",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204620",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/204640",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21260",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21505",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24649",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25234",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33614",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34050",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46356",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47752",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/48584",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/563",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5824",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6787",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"jwg",
"paul garrett",
"the_lotus"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
71552 | Does "Science" encompass Mathematics?
Inspired by the question Does the term “science” encompass humanities and the social sciences?, I would like to ask a question that has been in my mind for decades.
Does "Science" include Mathematics? Or, put in another way, is Mathematics part of Science?
What I understand about Math are: Math is not humanities. Math is not natural science. Math is not social science. If Math is part of science, what kind of science is it?
When people say STEM, do they mean Math is separate from Science? Or they just say it for the sake of convenience?
"Mathematics is the queen of sciences and arithmetic is the queen of mathematics" -- Gauss.
This question is a duplicate of a duplicate: http://math.stackexchange.com/q/288935.
@DanielR.Collins Sure, but, for instance, the queen of Australia isn't Australian.
@DanielR.Collins interestingly, Elizabeth II is queen of 16 countries but is apparently not legally a citizen of any of them (see here). So being queen of the sciences is perhaps not proof of being a science...
@FedericoPoloni beat me to it, but actually she is Australian (as the monarch she is "the embodiment of Australia" or some such nonsense), she is just not an Australian citizen. The legal and philosophical discussions on this question remind me of the question about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. They are about equally logical and clear, and concern an equally useless question. Same for the current question about math and science, btw.
Some additional ideas: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/287701/what-is-the-definition-of-mathematics
IMO, the response to Daniel's quotation is: yes, that's what someone who was one of the world's leading mathematicians and one of the world's leading scientists said over 150 years ago. So it's certainly interesting, but the question pertains to today. The fact that today there is no one who is viewed as a preeminent expert in science as a whole and no one who is at the top of a handful of academic disciplines (e.g. astronomy, geodesy, mathematics, physics, statistics) also seems relevant to the question. The academic landscape is much different now than in Gauss's day.
Actually, if we follow history's lesson, the most common way to become "queen of sciences" is invading sciences with your troops, destroying them militarily and forcing them to surrender.
@DanielR.Collins: how can a queen have another (sub-)queen? That's as if there were a queen for the UK and another for Birmingham.
@DanielR.Collins: Given that Gauß was German and I can find German versions of that quote (implying that the English version may be a translation), you should take into account that the German term Wissenschaft commonly encompasses pretty much everything that can be researched, not just "natural sciences". In fact, that difference in meaning between Wissenschaft and science was what the original question this question was motivated by was about.
@DanRomik I think questions aren't considered duplicates just becase they have been asked on other SE sites.
Relevant XKCD
Does science include mathematics for what purpose? If you're asking about funding by the US National Science Foundation, then yes. If you're asking about potential customers for your scientific lab-equipment catalog, then no.
Is the question very different from "Does science encompass English (or other language)?" But both questions might need to be differentiated from the study of math/English, which can be scientific.
I would say Mathematics is the language in which science can be expressed, I got this from an old lecturer that used to say 'Mathematics is the language of Physics'.
What definition of science do you want to use?
Depends who are the 'people' who 'say STEM' and the context within which they say it.
If one defines "science" as a process to understand the physical world through experimentation, which is a reasonable definition, then mathematics would not apply, since pure mathematics is not a study of the physical world and does not involve experimentation. The "scientific method" is not used in mathematics. Many things in mathematics are called "discoveries", the same way scientific concepts are called "discoveries", but they are not arrived at in the same way. There's a good case to be made for math being its own thing, since it's not merely a language either.
Or maybe "mathematics" encompasses "science".
@DanRomik: FWIW, The Queen would have held a passport prior to ascending the throne ("All other members of the Royal Family, including The Duke of Edinburgh and The Prince of Wales, have passports.")—and that document would have stated something under "citizenship"...
Related question on HSM: https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/54/when-did-mathematics-stop-being-one-of-the-sciences.
This is a good question, but there is no consensus as to a good answer. Some people think mathematics is obviously a science, some people think it obviously isn't, and some just aren't sure.
It's common to include mathematics as a special case of science in general discussions. For example, universities usually classify mathematics under the sciences, and "scientific publishing" would generally be understood to include mathematics. However, there are exceptions, and abstract discussions of science often don't apply very well to mathematics.
If this distinction matters in a given case, then you'll have to discuss it explicitly, since you can never assume everyone will agree by default.
If Math is part of science, what kind of science is it?
The most compelling answer I've heard is that it is a formal science. However, this terminology is somewhat obscure, and it is certainly not a consensus answer to your question.
When people say STEM, do they mean Math is separate from Science?
I don't think the intention is to assert that they are definitely separate, but rather just to have an inclusive acronym we can all agree on.
Super happy to be introduced to the term "formal science", thanks!
It's a "mathematical science" is a more tautological, but also common answer. (Statistics is certainly also a mathematical science, and I'd also use that term to refer to much of CS and theoretical physics.)
Though if math is considered a formal science, I would disagree with the statement from the wiki link: the formal sciences do not involve empirical procedures.
Mathematics is also an exact science, so since you can completely go around empirical methods and arrive at definite conclusions with it that are not prone to error, it's safer to take a "fact" in a mathematical textbook and assume that it really is true.
The mistake is in thinking that mathematics is purely an accounting term when in fact it is the language of science. Without numbers, most science can achieve is a hypothesis. In mathematics, the question is asked, a model is made, and a solution is sought to explain the data. This must then be explained. How does it not fit the scientific method? Most science started in math. Newton melded mathematics and physics. Yes, mathematics is a science.
One response. Differential equations, statistics, and data science.
The first definition of science that Merriam-Webster gives is:
: knowledge about or study of the natural world based on facts learned through experiments and observation
Math doesn't investigate the natural world and thus isn't a science according to that definition.
In How to Think Straight About Psychology Keith E. Stanovich defines 3 main traits of science.
Three of the most important are that (1) science employs methods of systematic empiricism; (2) it aims for knowledge that is publicly verifiable; and (3) it seeks problems that are empirically solvable and that yield testable theories (the subject of the next chapter).
Math isn't employing empiricism and thus doesn't fulfill criteria (1) and (3).
On the other hand, "I have tried to encourage the reader to think of the computer as a physicist would his laboratory - it may be used to check existing ideas about the construction of the world, or as a tool for discovering new phenomena which then demand new ideas for their explanation." -- Tristan Needham, Preface to Visual Complex Analysis (1996).
Math doesn't investigate the natural world - I don't think it's so clear cut. Discrete quantities occur (at least apparently) in the physical world, so counting, and thus combinatorics, investigates the natural world. If you disagree with this logic, then by the same logic, you should also not consider much of theoretical physics a "science."
@Kimball : The math that describes discrete quantities can't be invalidated by empirical experiments because mathematical claims are analytic in nature. They are true in all possible worlds.
@Hurkyl Empiricism is a useful tool in a mathematician's toolkit, but empirical evidence doesn't establish a theory in mathematics. Test millions of cases in an empirical science, and find that none of them violate the predictions of a hypothesis, and you start to establish a theory that people might accept and adopt. In mathematics, people still recognize it as a conjecture (which might be useful to accept as a premise in some proofs), and might expect that it's true, but still aim to prove or disprove it. Empirical methods are very helpful, but don't provide conclusions in mathematics.
This answer is so blatantly wrong it is laughable. What are you explaining then? Nothing. Mathematics is based almost entirely in the study of nature. Modern math came from Newton's study of physics. Saying this is like saying chemistry isn't science because its just a bunch of conversions. Math is empirical (if I experience something or have sensed a bunch of patterns I can then explain them) and it seeks solutions to patterns and nature that can be proven and tested.
@hurkyl yes, and I alluded to some of that type of use when I mentioned that we use unproven things as assumptions and work that way. E.g., we don't know whether P = NP, but there's lots of work that looks at the large body of examples suggesting that they're distinct, and we can reason with that as an assumption. In that sense there's a scientific theory based on P != NP with predictive power. The actual fact is still something that people want to prove. Empiricism can help guide, but it doesn't settle the question.
@AndrewScottEvans : If you would have asked Newton, Newton wasn't just concerned with the natural world. Newton wrote about occult subjects and Bible interpretation as well as writing about natural science. One of his core ideas was that math is so universal that it can be both used to understand the heavens and earth.
@Christian So Newton's 'natural' world was a bit of a stretch but until the 20th century those two might as well have been similar. It is no different than a difficult to prove or incorrect scientific theory depending on whether you are atheist or not. If I write 1 it means little if I say 1 + 1 is 2, I may as well have said if I add 1 of something to another one of something then I will have two of something, because having one more of an object makes that object plus another which is 2. I then have to prove it. That is the entire idea behind most mathematical studies.
@AndrewScottEvans : The fact that you can prove something analytically without looking at the natural world, makes it an analytic inquiry. You can't prove anything about the natural world as Popper argued.
@Christian Physics is full of such 'discoveries' as are many sciences. Long ago we could only predict outcomes, even some astronomy is written on paper to be discovered later. In fact, why not think of mathematics as generating its own realm governed by laws and theory within its own sphere. You may be giving to much credence to the functional but even that is just a system where forces acting on variables x,y,z create the outcome f(x,y,z). The analytical part is a portion of the whole not the entire whole.
@Christian In fact, how can you prove that adding 1 to any number of objects is 2. You need observation or proof of other patterns. Induction, observation, and the scientific process are highly important. Once you move beyond the basic building blocks, mathematics is highly scientific.
@AndrewScottEvans : No, if I add two piles of apples together I get one pile of apples. A mathematician can assume that certain axioms hold and prove that certain axioms are true. In Science you can't assume that anything is certain. Nature might always prove you wrong.
The problem is you are trying to limit mathematics to its very basics and ignoring its many fields
Platonic mathematics
the kind of mathematics having no essential connection with the physical world. I say "essential connection" because links between nature and esoteric mathematical notions spring up in unexpected places, like the surprising connection between locusts and prime numbers.
Natural mathematics
the kind of mathematics arising from the uncanny efficiency with which mathematics describes nature.
@AndrewScottEvans : The fact that there a link between abstract concepts and the natural world doesn't mean that they are the same thing.
On my journey through Computer Science, Machine Learning / AI, and Cryptography I've often wondered the same thing. Here's the way I currently see the interactions between math and its related disciplines through the branches of mathematics that I've studied:
I imagine there's a fair amount of subjectivity here, and that other branches of mathematics will have their own unique place on the Venn diagram.
There's experimental moral philosophy. I think that's science, so the nonoverlap between Science and Philosophy doesn't make sense to me.
@Christian Having never heard of experimental moral philosophy, I would have a hard time putting it in the diagram :P. I'm not saying that Science and Philosophy don't overlap, just that they haven't overlaped in any of the disciplines I've studied.
Weird diagram, I would consider logic strictly mathematical.
@YoTengoUnLCD Interesting. I've heard it the other way; mathematics is a subset of logic - which includes several non-mathematical fields. Wikipedia describes Mathematical Logic (like prepositional logic) as "applications of formal logic to mathematics" ... implying that formal logic is outside mathematics.
Unfortunately the duplicate in mathematics hasn't got good answers, so I will give it a try.
The answer is: Mu.
It means that the question must be unasked or that neither "yes" nor "no" is right or wrong.
Mathematics is examining the properties of consistent mental models or structures. It started with numbers and geometric figures and it was used for applications (counting, area calculation) from the beginning. It would not be completely wrong to name it "number philosophy" although it has expanded greatly and examines now a innumer...a very great number of concepts.
An example to show the difference to science: Let's say a scientist would try to prove the Pythagorean theoreom without mathematics. He would find out
that if we draw squares on the side of a right-angled triangle, the smaller ones look like they have the same area as the big one. He would experiment with it and while they really look very similar, he will never achieve an equal result. The cuts are not completely straight, the material bends, the lines have always some extent. Even if he succeeds in determining that for all tested right triangles the values are mostly equal, he/she can never be sure that it will stay so.
A mathematician can prove that the sides are exactly equal. This is possible because s/he does not use real-world modelling and is therefore not limited by their applications. But while it is not the real-world, it still allows discoveries. It is not self-evident that right triangles have this interesting property.
Mathematics is a necessary part of science because it is a building block for any precise models we need to refine the work. Physical values are models by numbers (or matrices/tensors) and a concept of a dimension. In higher physics countle...a big number of mathematical models are used.
For the reason that mathematicians and other scientists are sharing many mental similarities (curiosity, challenging matters of course and relishing hard, but interesting problems) their faculties are often joined together which results in the STEM field.
So mathematics is "sciency".
But...it is not really a science because it is more fundamental: It does not require knowledge or experience from other scientific fields. If a mathematician travels back in time 20 000 years (the humans were on a comparable intelligence level as today) he would be able to teach a bright kid modern mathematics which is impossible for modern science because there is no infrastructure to replicate experiments. Mathematics also has no room for error or reevaluation. Once the axioms are set (yes, if the axioms change, the result can change), a result is valid for all times.
Mathematics is also used massively outside science including the humanities.
So mathematics is not a science.
Part of your description of math sounds more like logic than math to me, and I'm not sure about some of your penultimate sentence. Some parts of math don't require understanding other fields, but the same is true in other fields of science. And there has been lot of misunderstandings in math, and consequently reevaluation.
@Kimball "sounds more like logic than math to me". Logic is not only part of mathematics, modern mathematical logic is the base for Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory: the mathematical foundation. Modern logic is much more powerful and stringent than the old syllogistic Aristotelan logic (building sentences from propositions). So yes: Logic is one vital part of mathematics. The reason I use a general "consistent mental models" is the variety of mathematical structures with different propreties which exist: numbers, ,differential forms, groups, nodes, graphs, logical propositions.
@Kimball "Some parts of math don't require understanding other fields". If you mean other fields than math: All parts of what we call math do not require understanding other fields. None. Zero. It is really that brutal, sorry. If you do not believe that, give a counterexample. The misunderstandings and errors depend only on human defectiveness; in natural sciences all the imperfectness of senses, measurement errors and failure to reproduce something lead to failures even if you have made perfect deductions.
The answer to this question is perhaps not as clear-cut as it might appear, i.e. the issue is not merely definitional.
Some (for example the physicist Roger Penrose, in his book `The Emperor's New Mind') believe that mathematical structures exist in a non-physical, Platonic realm.
Conversely, the quantum physicist David Deutsch has claimed (notably in his book, `The Fabric of Reality') that, since the brains of mathematicians are physical objects, then the structures they can apprehend are constrained by the laws of physics (more specifically, to be computable by a quantum computer).
In `Where Mathematics Comes From', the cognitive linguists Lakoff and Nunez claim that, even if a transcendent Platonic mathematics existed, we would be unable to experience it, since our conceptions are analogised from our physical experience of space, force, motion etc.
Here is a quote from a recent article in the Notices of the American Mathematical Society by AMS President Robert Bryant:
People say that mathematics is logical, but the logical aspect is only part of it. Mathematicians usually don’t proceed logically. They make guesses, see patterns, do experiments, develop beliefs. Almost nothing in that process
is purely logical.
I'd personally say that this alone puts mathematics on a conceptually equivalent status to physics, but not everyone would agree with this.
I guess I don't really understand the relevance of most of what you say to the question at hand. Is the existence of or contemplation of a "non-physical, Platonic realm" part of science? I would think not.
Pete L. Clark - What I'm getting at is that the question of whether or not mathematics is Platonic is open (but possibly not falsifiable). If mathematics can be reduced to questions about the nature of consistent human pattern perception, then it is within the realm of physics. Certainly, if science can be considered to be "hypothesize, experiment, potentially revise hypothesis, repeat", then Bryant seems to be saying that he thinks mathematics is a science, which I would personally agree with.
"What I'm getting at is that the question of whether or not mathematics is Platonic is open (but possibly not falsifiable)." Sorry, I didn't get it. I said that the Platonicity of mathematics is not a scientific question, and you hint that it might not be. But if it isn't, why is it relevant to the answer? "If mathematics can be reduced to questions about the nature of consistent human pattern perception, then it is within the realm of physics." This doesn't make a lot of sense to me...
If, as Deutch claims, all possible mathematics can be simulated by a quantum computer then mathematics is a sub-discipline of physics as a matter of fact rather than being an issue of definition.
...That which lives in the physical universe is governed by the laws of physics. That applies to all human activity and in particular to all academic disciplines. In this way I can also reduce all academic disciplines to chemistry, biology, psychology and so forth. But these are trivial remarks, unhelpful both intellectually and in terms of a practical understanding of contemporary academia. I wonder whether I have misunderstood what you're saying.
It's not trivial in the context of academic practice because, culturally and historically speaking, pure mathematicians have tended to resist thinking that the laws of the physical universe apply to them. The notion that physical/statistical notions have a bearing on expressible pure mathematics (Deutch,Chaitin) is not common currency.
"It's not trivial in the context of academic practice because, culturally and historically speaking, pure mathematicians have tended to resist thinking that the laws of the physical universe apply to them." Well, now I am sure that I don't understand what you're saying. Which mathematician has expressed skepticism that the laws of the physical universe apply to him or her?
Let us continue this discussion in chat.
More specifically, I mean "Don't apply to their mathematical conceptions", e.g. a perfect circle.
Sorry, your comments are too enigmatic for me to be drawn into a discussion. Just FYI, your practice of writing "more specifically" and then writing something brief that changes the meeting entirely caused me to give up.
Pete L. Clark - That's a pity. Just to clarify for the record: in response to your question about `laws of the physical universe applying to mathematicians', I mean: most mathematicians are happy to consider a perfect circle.
Max Tegmark has also put forward the hypothesis of a mathematical multiverse. To me this makes sense, you get rid of many philosophical problems if you dump the notion of a physical universe. If all that exists of our universe is nothing more than its formal mathematical description, then that description is a timeless entity, there is then nothing to explain about something having come into existence out of nothing.
I'll go for a semi-yes (maybe more).
When one says mathematics is not real, as compared to physics, I generally question the person about the reality of an electron. How does he know an electron is real? Ever seen one? Or guessed through models and measurements?
I long believed mathematics was not a science. However, parts of mathematics have become quite computational. Think about proofs for the 4-color theorem. Mathematics can teach about real-world problems, see the Pentium problem. And I am seduced by Alain Connes views on the existence of an
archaic mathematical reality outside space-time yet as inexhaustible as normal physical reality
discussed in details on SE Archaic mathematical reality:
Take prime numbers, for example, which as far as I'm concerned,
constitute a more stable reality than the material reality that
surrounds us
So, along with the increasing use of some mathematics in nowadays data engineering (data science/big data buzz words), I am more and more convinced that large parts of mathematics can be considered science... at least no less that string theory (Why String Theory Is Not A Scientific Theory).
Are you a Popperian falsificationist? Then you believe that only those statements that can be disproved by experiment can be classified as science, and as such, mathematics is not a science.
Of course, there are those that believe that mathematics is an experimental science, and the lab is the computer. If you are of this opinion, then math is a science in the Popperian sense, but most people think that software and hardware bugs are so common that this stance is untenable.
If you find Paul Feyerabend's epistemogical anarchism convincing, then you will claim that mathematics is a science, as it produces tangible value.
I personally wouldn't classify mathematics as a science. The best definition I can offer is mathematics is a set of techniques for thinking clearly about quantity and shape. But even that definition can be challenged with little effort.
Experiments are performed in the brains of mathematicians, not just `in the lab'.
While there are certainly some mathematical statements that are not falsifiable (Godel, Turing), surely you are not claiming that this is in general the case?
"quantity and shape" — math is the study of formal objects, not high school geometry and algebra.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.479631 | 2016-06-19T14:48:48 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/71552",
"authors": [
"A E",
"Andrew Scott Evans",
"Angela Frederick",
"Arlene Griffin",
"Bitwise",
"Christian",
"Count Iblis",
"Dan Romik",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"David says Reinstate Monica",
"Federico Poloni",
"HDE 226868",
"Hadi Kolivand",
"JeffE",
"Joshua Taylor",
"Kimball",
"Maryy tate",
"Mike Ounsworth",
"Minh-Anh Huynh",
"Muneeb Afzal",
"NietzscheanAI",
"Noah Snyder",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Panzercrisis",
"Paul Proteus",
"Pete L. Clark",
"Quora Feans",
"RUSNI BINTI MUSTAFFA SKM-HQ",
"Ronavee Dacquil",
"Srishti Chaudhary",
"Taiyeba",
"Ten zin dhonen Ticra 10",
"The Nate",
"TheLethalCoder",
"Thorsten S.",
"Todd Wilcox",
"Vinyard Garage Doors Inc",
"YoTengoUnLCD",
"Yunbior",
"davidbak",
"eggyal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10073",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13452",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17479",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17609",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17620",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200845",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200846",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200847",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200860",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200866",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200879",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200881",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200882",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200887",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200889",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200896",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200929",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/200931",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20241",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23260",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24649",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/25",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/26570",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34315",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35515",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36686",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37061",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44079",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45709",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51948",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54024",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6862",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8313",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8970",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"user2338816"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
12904 | Good book on English for academic writing and speaking for non-native speakers
I'm not native speaker so I always have some problems with academic writing and speaking. Any good book for English in the academic context generally or for Computer Science in particular (writing or speaking)?
For English for non-native speakers I strongly recommend:
Day, R.A. & Sakaduski, N.., 2011. Scientific English. A guide for scientists and other professionals. Third edition. Greenwood, Santa Barbara CA.
Glasman-Deal, H., 2012. Science research writing for non-native speakers of English. Imperial College Press, London.
Both cover general writing in English. In addition, it is difficult to avoid
Strunk, W. Jr & White E.B., The elements of style. Fourth Edition. Longman, New York.
The latter is a classic usually referred to as just Strunk & White.
+1 for the classic Strunk and White. Superb book for concise, easy to understand writing.
It would be useful if you wrote your research area. For a mathematician, Nicholas Higham's "Handbook of Writing for the Mathematical Sciences" is a good choice.
Computer Science
Add it to your question, as not everyone will be interested in comments under one of the answers.
I can recommend
English for Writing Research Papers
English for Presentations at International Conferences
English for Academic Correspondence and Socializing
all written by Adrian Wallwork and published by Springer.
The author shows examples from his work as a reviewer and a language teacher/professor and corrects them, so he writes an original version and the revised version. In some cases he mentiones specific problems of people from several countries with the English language.
The author wrote also a grammar book, but I don't know it.
Loved Alley's book because it focuses on scientific/technical writing as a craft and highlights quality criteria of scientific writing:
Alley, M. (1996). The Craft of Scientific Writing (3rd ed.). New York: Springer.
You may consider the following books:
On Writing Well : William Zinsser;
The Elements of Style : Strunk and White;
Sin and Syntax : Constance Hale;
Source: SciWrite: Writing in the Sciences.
You may also take the online course i.e. Writing in the Sciences at the following website:
https://class.stanford.edu/courses/Medicine/SciWrite/Fall2013/about
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.482102 | 2013-09-22T23:35:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12904",
"authors": [
"BattleCat",
"Darkhalo",
"Doan",
"Fedor Kazakov",
"OperaticSkeleton",
"RJ-",
"Seenu S",
"Tanner Mancil",
"Vedran Šego",
"confusedpostdoc",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112156",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/112165",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19923",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32761",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32762",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32763",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32764",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32777",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32779",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32791",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33690",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7161",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8544",
"kozina-adjacent",
"sali",
"undergrad1123571317",
"yash Purohit"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
11041 | Is it plagiarism to copy formulations from others?
As a non-native speaker of english, I often struggle with always finding new, well-sounding, non-repetitive descriptions for the same thing and I also, to be honest, find it a waste of time of always having to do something different. For example:
Section 1 describes the X while section 2 is about the Y.
The Z is explained in section 3 and section 4 refers to A. The next section is about B...
Is it ok to just copy the formulation of someone else (of course my X,Y,Z,... are completely different) and always use the same thing?
You might also be interested in this question of mine about the expression that you cite: http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3501/whats-the-point-in-the-paper-is-structured-as-follows
Sentence patterns are not intellectual property; otherwise, every author who wrote "To X or not to X" would be plagiarizing Shakespeare. (They are "riffing" off of him, but not plagiarizing!)
The example you are citing is perfectly innocuous, particularly since you are not doing anything more than summarizing the paper contents. The only thing that would make it wrong would be to copy those sentences directly from someone else's work.
@kirdie In case you are not familiar with "To be or not to be", please refer to Shakespeare's famous phrase
Well I'm not a native speaker but I know that phrase :-)
There is a fine line between copying and plagiarism. In general the answer would be no, copying would be plagiarism. However, with certain fomulations there may be limited ways to vary. If the text you copy has some intellectual value, the result of someones inventiveness more than just lining up words to form a sentence, then the formulation has intellectual value and should be referenced, not for th eEnglish but for its content. A trivial sentence is just language and it is not unlikely that one would formulate a sentence identically to someone else. We also learn language from looking at how others (who we believe are better than ourselves) may express themselves. This is not plagiarism.
So for me the critical issue is if there is content other than linguistics that is being copied, if so then plagiarism is round the corner. So as a final statement, I would say: better safe than sorry; don't copy stuff, try to use the linguistic formulation but write the sentence with your word. Learn grammar and speling by checking what others do and emulate, not copy.
If in doubt, just repeat yourself.
One of the things that stands out about reading papers written by poor English speakers is the ugly contortions they go to in order to avoid repeating themselves. "X is about Y. Z is about W. A is about B" may be repetitive but it's perfectly understandable. I would suggest that you do this rather than attempting to copy the form of another writer, I'd also note that your assumption that you can simply lift the same form each time and have it look right may well be wrong anyway.
I realise this doesn't answer the question you actually posed but I think it deals with the question you need answering.
^this. With some effort you will have a number of these descriptive phrases that you can re-use and at least you know they are yours. The example you give seems to be a very obvious case to "copy" someone else, but it is also an example where there is no actual need to do so. You would pretty much end up with the same phrase if you start writing by yourself. However once you start copying others, you may end up crossing the line without noticing. Better to build up the discipline of processing someone else's thought and then writing it in your own words.
No, your example is definitely not plagiarism.
More generally, you can refer to the book "Writing for Computer Science" by Justin Zobel (Second edition, p.65, Section Quotations) to decide when to quote and when to merely copy:
"note that it is not essential to quote such a dull statement as
(...); paraphrase, or even simply omitting the quote symbols, would be
more appropriate. Omisission of quotation marks in this case is
acceptable--that is, not plagiarism--because (this) statement is a
natural way to express the concept."
The case Zobel is talking about is completely different. His example deals with whether it's necessary to put quotation marks around "open sets are of insufficient power" in the sentence "Crosley [2000] argues that open sets are of insufficient power". In Zobel's example sentence, I agree that it would not be plagiarism to omit the quotation marks even if "open sets are of insufficient power" was taken verbatim from Crosley, but I don't see how this is relevant to the question asked here. Zobel isn't saying that you can just copy a "natural way to express the concept" with no attribution.
I did understand exactly that, that copying "a natural way to express the concept" was not plagiarism. (Which does not mean that the concept itself should not be correctly be attributed and referenced.)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.482364 | 2013-07-09T09:55:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11041",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Christophe Rhodes",
"Federico Poloni",
"FvD",
"J.y B.y",
"Konrad Höffner",
"Mikey",
"Niels Abildgaard",
"Nobody",
"akshay kadole",
"anjchang",
"direbire",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1318",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27424",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27425",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27426",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27427",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27428",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27438",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27443",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7324",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7710",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"iamcam",
"user3766624"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
9453 | Why does the copy editor want Nature to be “Nature (London)”?
I have noticed that the copy editors of at least two publishers (the American Institute for Physics and American Physical Society) do something weird when they copy-edit my submitted papers. For all references to papers in Nature, which I include in my references as such:
J. W. Doe, Nature 197, 412 (1974)
they replace “Nature” by “Nature (London)”:
J. W. Doe, Nature (London) 197, 412 (1974)
I do not understand why they do that! I know it is customary in they style for books to have a city next to the publisher name (though I don't think it is very relevant in this day and age), but why do it for journals? Are there multiple different editions of Nature?
The first thing for me to say is I do not know, but I assume it is because they need to differentiate with another journal. According to the Web of Science list of journal abbreviations Nature should be listed as"Nature" and nothing else. There is another journal called Nature but with the abbreviation "Cah Rev The". I think yu can strongly argue for nature as "Nature" based on the fact that it is the Web of Science abbreviation and that "(London)" is not part of it. It would at least be interesting to know why they chose a non-s
For these journals, the copy editor is correct. "Nature (London)" is listed in the American Physical Society's house style for abbreviations, which makes it the standard abbreviation for APS journals, and it is also in the American Institute of Physics's list. It's not part of a general pattern of including locations, but rather a special case.
Presumably the inclusion of "London" was originally intended to avoid some long-ago ambiguity, perhaps with La Nature. It sounds like La Nature was more of a popular magazine about science than a modern scientific journal, but then again so was Nature in its early history.
There is no serious ambiguity about the name Nature today, but publishers are reluctant to change abbreviations, partly out of fear that if you've been using a specific abbreviation for many decades, a careful reader may wonder whether a different abbreviation is a mistake or even refers to another journal.
Indeed, according to both AIP style guide, as well as APS style guide, references to journal articles should be referred to without a place of publication. However, in the ACS style guide on page 9, you can read the following:
For some periodicals whose CASSI abbreviation includes a place of publication, you need not add the place of publication unless its omission would
create ambiguity. If CASSI lists only one journal with a given main title, there is no ambiguity in omitting the place of publication.
And indeed, the CASSI tool entry for Nature reads as follows:
Displaying Record for Publication: Nature (London, United Kingdom)
Thanks… though it makes me wonder why CASSI has Nature (London, UK) while it clearly is nowhere to be found in the official title in the Nature journal or its web pages…
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.482805 | 2013-04-18T08:12:37 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9453",
"authors": [
"Ami Chagol",
"Blackgirl5",
"Daniel Goldman",
"F'x",
"Gürkan Özsoy",
"Peter Jansson",
"bpt3",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23164",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23165",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23179",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23182",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23193",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
12235 | Using "Smith et al" when another Smith is also referenced
My name is John Smith and I'm writing a paper. In the discussion of the existing literature, I cite quite a few papers from another team, including many whose first author was a David Smith. I usually write this using heavily the “et al” style:
Einstein et al. first established in 1976 a possible plan for eradicating world hunger by massive beet culture in Antartica,1 but it took 20 years before Wiles et al. clearly delineated the challenges of such a prospect.2 The earlier analyses, by Smith et al.,3–7 held the narrow view that climate3–5 and transportation issues6–7 would be the limiting factors, forgetting to address the marketing aspects and negative implications on consumer image of the brand. In this paper, we present …
(the journal style calls for superscript numbers for citations)
Now, it seems somewhat likely that the reader may think the Smith from “Smith et al.” may actually be me. How should I help avoid this?
Not worrying about it.
Use first name or initial, “David Smith et al.” or “D. Smith et al.”
Choosing another author, like the last author, as in “Professor et al.”?
Some other formulation?
#2. This is the way I've seen it on other papers.
#1. The list of references should contain at least initials, which hopefully make clear this is another Smith.
I like your example, too!
Working through your list:
Using just the standard "Smith et al." is the usual standard that I've seen in my fields (physics, materials science, chemical engineering).
If you feel the need to indicate explicitly that this is not your work, then you can choose to use a variant that includes the full initials of the author:
"D. A. Smith et al. found. . . ."
Using a formulation "Professor et al." is incorrect usage of et al., which is normally used to designate in "actual" order the authors listed. The better formulation would be "Jones and colleagues" or "Jones and co-workers"; however, if the same first author is responsible for all of the papers, then using one of the other authors as the "focal point" is very misleading.
Other formulations, I believe, would be much less common than any of the other variants you've listed.
However, you could always try to just avoid mentioning Smith's name by referring to the contents of the work directly without saying "Smith et al. did X," by writing "X has been observed under conditions Y" or something similar.
If your references clearly can be traced to a unique paper then the name is not (or should not be) confusing. Yes, someone may mistake you for someone else or vice versa but then their checking of sources is out of sub-par. You can safely continue referencing the (standard) way you do it.
If two publications exist as Smith yyyy (Smith et al. yyyy) then it is common to use letters so that the references become Smith yyyya and Smith yyyyb (Smith et al. yyyya; Smith et al. yyyyb). So not even in this case is it necessary to add initials. You may find that initials are used in older puiblications but by introducing the letters to distinguish several similar references initials have become obsolete.
It is also possible to add indicators in the text that allows the reader to understand where your work is referenced by using "we" or "I" (as the case may be) when discussing a particular reference/result, that is use an active voice instead of passive.
This is how I have always seen it done.
Problem is that citation style in my field is most often superscript numbers (and references ordered at the end)… that doesn't help with disambiguation!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.483073 | 2013-08-28T07:29:44 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12235",
"authors": [
"Chris Gregg",
"F'x",
"Michael A.",
"Nadia Ali",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Saul ",
"Shawn ",
"Theolodis",
"earthling",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30842",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30845",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30867",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30868",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30870",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4461"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
9581 | How to cope with gap after PhD?
I submitted my PhD recently and am waiting for the oral examination. Though I have started looking for postdoc positions, the possibility of being without a job, even if for a small period after the viva, is quite frightening. How can I cope with it?
I'm facing the same situation. You could go on vacation. You could go job hunting. Depending on your skills, you could do a freelancer job.
Write papers, apply for jobs, relax.
It is not easy to relax when you have to pay the bills at the end of the month...
One possibility to check about—which I took advantage of at the end of my own graduate career—is that of being hired short-term as a teaching assistant. The good news is that you would have extra time to find a new position. The challenge is that you would be making a commitment to teaching for an additional semester. It would have significant ramifications if you were to skip out on this duty if you obtained a job offer to start immediately at a company, or a postdoc offer at another university.
Very good, realistic, useful suggestion.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.483397 | 2013-04-23T15:18:12 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9581",
"authors": [
"AndersK",
"D. Salvo",
"Dave Clarke",
"Eekhoorn",
"Federico Poloni",
"ThePortakal",
"chux",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23505",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23507",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23521",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23529",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44514",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"user44514"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
118220 | Should I decline unrelated work assigned by PhD advisor?
During the past years of my PhD program in biology, my advisor has developed a habit of lending my service to other labs/groups for potential collaborating opportunities. In addition to helping fellow students in the lab with their projects, I've helped a handful of other labs/groups with various data analysis and statistical testing tasks that were totally unrelated to my PhD project; I rarely got anything in return other than practicing my relevant skills.
There is a lab in our department that I helped with data analysis in June. I've submitted my PhD thesis in August. This lab now came back to my advisor asking for a further work involving testing the correlation between the expressions of 200ish genes and different phenotype in 20ish RNA-seq datasets. My advisor has handed the job to me again.
It is not a small task to me, and since the submission of my PhD thesis my scholarship has stopped so I have to work to pay the bills. Also, I feel unappreciated because the other lab doesn't even know I am the person doing the job, and they will probably list my advisor as a co-author should there be a paper.
I'd like to know if I should turn down the request, even if it will potentially result in my advisor rejecting a recommendation letter? My advisor once jokingly mentioned that they are holding their recommendation letters hostage so I have to continue working for them (for free). I've done tons of unrelated and unpaid works for them and this project feels like the last straw.
"My advisor once jokingly mentioned that they are holding their recommendation letters hostage" -- that's unethical behavior. Even joking about it is highly unethical regardless of whether you mean it, since (as in your case) those listening may take it as a real threat.
Get yourself listed as a co-author on any paper produced from your work. That might be the best you can hope for and might also be reasonable to them.
In some circumstances you can dodge out of these obligations by saying you just got hired part-time for a very lucrative position and will be getting promoted to full-time as soon as your degree clears. You would need to play off questions about your new job by saying you signed an NDA (in particular, do NOT claim to be working at a specific company). Obviously this only works if you are a good liar, and are reclusive enough that the advisor couldn't easily fact-check your vague claims. And you don't want the lie to snowball into a sitcom episode...
Just to clarify, when you say "holding their recommendation letters hostage", do you mean that that other group would refuse to provide you a recommendation letter, or that your advisor would refuse to write you one, if you didn't do the required work?
My first advice would be to talk to your advisor, especially since your scholarship has run its course. No reasonable person would insist under the circumstances, but you should also consider that there might a misunderstanding, e.g. that your advisor feels that you benefit from such an arrangement, so an honest conversation might clear everything up. However, if the latter part of my question is the case, that goes beyond unethical and I wouldn't be surprised if your problems wouldn't matter to a person like this.
There are a few options you have. First, is to unconditionally refuse to do the assigned work and take the consequences, whatever they might be. Second, to conditionally refuse to work, i.e. you won't do it unless they compensate you for it (pay, authorship, etc.). Third, to suck it up, as you are about to graduate soon and hopefully leave that institution, it might be worth considering that this is the last time you have to do something like that.
Now, what worries me the most is the possibility that your graduation could be sidelined or delayed in order to force you to work more for them (you didn't comment whether or not that was a possibility). If that is the case, all the other options are rather useless and in comes the fourth option, that I deliberately avoided above as being the most destructive: escalate the whole thing to the higher-ups (the department level, the university level, maybe even an attorney) and hope that in some future your case will be resolved.
Based on the question, I can't gauge the scope of the corruption, i.e. is only the advisor corrupted, does the other group know that you are essentially forced to work for them, for free, does the department condone such behavior? That and the location your based at, should help you define the impact of the fourth option.
Bottom line, my advice is: get out of there as soon as you can. Make a cost-benefit analysis of your next actions. Ask yourself questions like: What would it take just to graduate? What would it take to graduate and ensure reasonable recommendations? Can I afford it (and here I don't mean just the financial part, but also the price in time, mental health, opportunities, etc.)?
Thanks so much for your answer. To answer your questions: 1) It is my advisor who will probably refuse to provide me with a recommendation letter if I decline the job; 2) There is no misunderstanding: my advisor doesn't give me the job believing I will benefit from it. The job falls into the area of my expertise; no other members in the lab including my advisor is able to get the job done; 3) Other labs will probably list my advisor as a co-author, without caring who actually did the job in our lab; 4) My institution is in Australia where a viva or defense is not required for PhD students.
@Well_uneducated Thanks for the clarification. So, as I see it, you already graduated by submitting your thesis. If that is the case, what is keeping you there? Do you want to stick around for the LoR? If so, your advisor might hold that forever over your head.
My thesis needs to be examined by examiners and I’ve been waiting for the outcome. I don’t go to school now, my advisor is expecting me work remotely for him. Anyway I’ve decided to tell my advisor that they can either pay me or list me as one of the co-authors. Thank you for your suggestions!
There is absolutely no way your adviser should be asking you to do this without a pre-existing case-iron guarantee from the other group that YOU will be listed as a co-author on any paper. You should simply refuse to do anything without this. As a bioinformatician, who sees this sort of thing happening all the time, it makes me SO mad.
Very politely notify them your scholarship and RA position (or whatever it is called that requires you to do work in return for money) has ended, and offer a consulting rate to continue. Make sure there's an agreed-upon number of hours for each task, so they aren't thinking they can give you one hour of work at a time, when the emails alone take longer than that. Research in most fields doesn't happen unless there is a fountain of money behind it, so this is not as beyond the pale as it may seem from your perspective. Just be careful to make clear it is simply the economic situation of the real world (which apparently they forgot they live in) that is the issue, not that you are making these demands to be unhelpful and make them go away.
If they can't pay you, then you can offer to help someone else take over the work, for example by giving them a list of steps and answering their questions via email.
Or you can offer to help in exchange for co-authorship, but then make sure you get into the loop so it is clear to all that they are violating journal terms by not including you as a co-author. If they are dependent on your analysis for their paper at this point, they may put in a position where you are compelled by professionalism to help them finish, but of course this needs to be out in the open with a promise of at least co-authorship in return.
Everyone with valuable skills has to deal with this kind of thing. People will push until you push back. The overwhelming majority aren't necessarily as cutthroat as the occasional bad joke might imply; they just convinced themselves your time is near-worthless while theirs is precious. Clarify to them this is not the case anymore.
Thank you for your advice. I totally agree with your comment especially the last paragraph. Instead of simply rejecting the task, I will offer my help in exchange of a fee or co-authorship.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.483567 | 2018-10-11T06:49:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/118220",
"authors": [
"Buffy",
"David Ketcheson",
"Ian Sudbery",
"Well_uneducated",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14133",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35057",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82972",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99099",
"user3209815",
"user45623"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
150951 | What should you do when your professor does not pay you for completed research work?
I had an oral agreement with a supervisor that I was to complete research work for him. We established how many hours I was to work, and my hourly rate, when the work was to be done, etc. I completed the work, sent it off to him, he gave me some feedback and asked me to correct some citations and so, I incorporated the feedback, made fixes to my citations and then never heard back from him.
I recently emailed him about not being paid; he told me that he was not able to use the work and instead offered to find me alternative funding opportunities in the future. When I insisted that I did the work and deserved to get paid for my time, he threatened to report me for academic integrity issues. I'm only a Master's student, and this is my first research assistant position. Is this normal? Who should I speak to about this?
I am not part of a union, and my supervisor approached me to do this work. I do have email correspondence that confirms we have an agreement, but not confirming the specific terms (e.g. he wrote emails where he told me, submit your work and your time/hour log and I will pay you). He later revealed he had used the grant money to pay a different student to do different work.
The oral contract was made in front of others. It was in a lab setting, so others definitely overheard. Another clarification was that another student was to take over the work I began because I was going on an exchange to a different school. So there is more proof of a contract existing between my supervisor and me. My #1 concern is the threat of reporting me for academic integrity. My #2 concern is getting paid. I've contacted my faculty and was advised to report this to the dean of my faculty, which I'll be doing shortly.
Which country is this in?
@Scared-scarecrow And you still have the time log, and record of submitting it? How much are we talking about here? Not to say you aren't owed it no matter how much, but approaching getting $400 is very different than $5000
I have edited the post to transfer some useful clarifications from the comments into the post itself. I also removed a ton of answers-in-comments; please use the answer box for answers.
On a related note, what did we learn about oral contracts?
I recommend getting hard copies (i.e. print-outs) of all of the e-mail correspondence (in case your e-mails disappear from their servers - not likely, but possible).
"This is my first research assistant position": that is not a "research assistant position", it is just an intellectual property theft!
Do you have any idea what sort of "academic integrity issues" he's threatening to report you for?
I am also interested in what the "academic integrity issues" are supposed to be. (Also: let us know, how this turned out.)
@Valorum As George R R Martin put it: "Words are wind".
Is this normal?
No. In most places, wage theft is a serious crime.
Who should I speak to about this?
The HR department. Possibly also the department chair. Provide a detailed written statement of what happened and when.
+1 for going to the institution's HR department. It's a chronic problem that academics and researchers will make ad-hoc hires without going through proper process, and HR will have people whose whole jobs are to sort out the messes that they create. You may end up being owed benefits because the nature of your work falls into a category which they've already categorized. Best case for you (worst ever for the supervisor) is if your tasks fell into a category within the scope of a contract of an existing union.
Good point, if there's a union you might speak to them too. Though you might need to pay a membership fee.
Also contact student support, the person in charge of your masters, and any personal tutor that you may have. The PI, in addition to acting appallingly unethically by not paying you and by threatening you, may well have broken the University's own rules by employing you without contract and proper process.
Should contact both parties mentioned in the order mentioned. Talking to the student union would probably also be beneficial. Once HR is involved the chair won't have option but to investigate. However, keep in mind that HR is NOT your friend.
I was in a similar situation (1 month's coding work for a professor of a different university with a view for a grant together down the line), but HR, not the professor, was the issue. HR was definitely not my friend. The verbal contract was in conflict with all sorts rules and regulations so they could not pay and the professor was too busy to fight it —so I politely declined to submit the grant and cut my losses.
An Oral Agreement, with presumably no third parties to witness the agreement. Good luck collecting anything. This will just become a mud-slinging fest, with the student's word vs. the professor's.
As others have suggest - the prof almost certainly did not have the power to make a contract between you and the university (you would have been employed by the university, not by the professor). The likely outcome is that the professor will be in deep trouble with the university, but in the end the professor is not in a position to make a contract on the university's behalf, and so it is probably not valid.
@IanSudbery: I'm not so sure about your last statement - at the very least it will depend very much on legislation. Here in Germany, I'd think it quite likely that the student has a valid employment contract with the university. But even if not, they are still entitled to either fulfilment or damages (which would be the same since they already fulfilled their part of the contract).
Almost certainly depends on the location, and IANAL, but in the UK its not possible for just any old employee to enter into a contract on behalf of an organisation. Would you think the same if it were a postdoc saying this rather than a professor? If so, what would be the legal difference?
@IanSudbery: At least at the universities where I have been, it is quite possible for the professor to do most of the correct administrative work without the student seeing any of this, in partiular for the small HiWi (student assistant) contracts. Legally, a professor (or a postdoc) can have implicit or explicit permission to hire a student on behalf of the university. A professor saying "I'll hire you as student assistant." would not be unusual at all - even if the actual employer is the university. "Expect administration to take some months until this all is sorted out, and several more
more months until you actually see any money" would be a usual follow up sentence, but you really cannot conclude anything about the professor being in bad faith from this not being said. A professor over here is a public official whose job is to teach the student how academia works. That is a very strong position for the student assuming good faith. Postdoc offereing a job: Two relevant differences are that a professor always has at least some budget, and that the postdoc is subordinate to a professor - while the professor is not subordinate to anyone (though of course still bound by rules).
So the postdoc should say or show that they have a budget and permission to hire someone, but then: why not. E.g. if there's an ad on the whiteboard "student help wanted for ..., Dr Postdoc" Also, the professor is usually the "contact" employee at the university that manages the student help. HR would certainly expenct the professor to be the one to tell a student to not work if they erraneously show up for work in order to prevent a valid employment contract forming by conduct implying intent. The example we were warned aganist by administration is: someones fixed term contract expires. New
contract has not yet arrived. The "[non]employee" comes to work, and the PI/professor does not tell them to go home, or even worse, actively hands out work or collects results. This starts a valid permanent working contract and is the nightmare of HR.
I guess its location dependent. Yes a prof might say what your prof said, but they would then initiate the process with the admin - but its the admin that actually does the "hire" even if the student never sees this. The university has not agreed to employ someone until HR says so. A prof here is absolutely subordinate to someone - their HoD, their head of faculty and ultimately the senate and executive board. They are not a public official, they are an employee of a corporation like any other employee - same legal rights and responsibilities as the cleaner.
The university might have budgeted for the Prof to spend money, but the money remains the property of the university. Even if the Prof can request they spend it on something (probably through an automated mechanism for a simple purchase), they still retain the final say and can say no. Only the university can raise a purchase order with a supplier for example, the prof can't on their own.
No, this is not normal. If an agreement about number of working hours and an hourly salary is made, the salary is normally supposed to be paid according to that agreement.
It is not clear to me if a contract was written up, or if everything was oral agreements. If there is no contract, and no written correspondence to confirm the agreement, you will unfortunately have a hard time lifting this case. But in any case, the correct person to contact (which is your question), is your union, or a local union representative at your institution - that is, if unions are common in your country, which you don't mention.
If you are not a member of a union, you should become so if that is a possibility.
You should also start looking for another supervisor, as this person clearly don't have your best interest in mind.
You should report this to a some authority.
The chances are good (but we do not know this) that the person has done this before and will do it again. Ethically if you have evidence enough to make a formal complaint you should to prevent them exploiting people. Ethically and practically are, however, two different things - you will have to make the decision yourself.
he wrote emails where he told me, submit your work and your time/hour log and I will pay you
That is sufficient grounds to take a complaint case. It is borderline whether it is enough to successfully take a legal case for failing to pay against them. It is not quite a contract (IANAL) I think, as the terms would be explicit (e.g. how much per hour or in total) for a contract. If you have corresponding emails now saying he will not pay that would be much stronger.
Strictly speaking you need legal advice specific to you country from your own lawyer.
Do not expect to ever get paid. You can possibly put an end to this person's behavior (by maybe getting them fired), but getting paid is not so easy.
I recently emailed him about not being paid;
Email is your friend here. Hopefully the replies were in email.
Make records of any emails, e.g. print them, copy them to disk. Get copies of texts by phone or whatsapp fs whatever if possible and try and get recordings of any phone messages left for you.
Courts and formal review processes will need evidence like this.
he told me that he was not able to use the work
This is rarely a legitimate complaint in a labor case (which is what you would probably have here - again IANAL). If your work was OK up until you asked for payment a court would typically take that as a demonstration your work was OK and without fundamental flaw. There would have to be a history of consistent complaint from the other person to justify not paying. They should also have stopped using you to assist them to be able to defend their position. Stopping after you ask for payment they refuse to make is too late.
and instead offered to find me alternative funding opportunities in the future.
That is known as "bait and switch", it's not considered reasonable. You expected to be paid, but unfortunately did not have an explicit agreement on the form of that payment, so it might be a slight weak point.
When I insisted that I did the work and deserved to get paid for my time, he threatened to report me for academic integrity issues.
If he was foolish enough to do that in email, you have an extremely serious case against him for abuse of power. He was acting an an employee of an institute and your supervisor so that is a case you can directly take against them. Typically you would make a formal complaint first via the institute's normal procedure. I would expect that to be enough to put this individual in danger of loosing their job - I'd personally fire someone for doing this (when good evidence existed), but your institute and country's normal practices are unknown to me.
Make sure you have good legal advice for this process. Join a union and request their help and advice - they typically have a legal representative they can at least put you in touch with, sometimes for reduced fees or free as an initial step. If that is not an opinion get your own lawyer.
I have to remind you that even VERBAL agreements are contracts - or contract-like .. unfortunately harder to prove than written contracts - except made in front of third parties
@eagle275 My understanding is that the OP has emails, so verbal contracts or agreements would have practically no significance here. Any written agreement will override a verbal one and you cannot amend a written agreement (or an agreement in a similar form) with a verbal one. So if we agreed by email to do X for Y, then later neither of us would be able to enforce a verbal change to that agreement - it would have to be by email or in writing. That's the law as I understand it, but IANAL.
No my comment is based on the post of OP - he says that the exact amount and conditions were agreed upon only verbally - which still constitutes a contract - then he has emails about "correct X and hand in your hours and I'll pay you" which supports the argument of the verbal agreement/ contract ..
@eagle275 As I said in my answer, the emails are not quite an explicit contract, but my point was that the supervisor's emails effectively acknowledged the contract in writing and trying to undo the contract (and make threats) means that the supervisor's claims will carry practically zero weight compared to the written evidence of emails.
@eagle275 IANAL, but professors are not employers, universities are. Given that a professor has no authority to make contracts on the university's behalf, I doubt the contract is valid. For example someone who worked front of house at McDonald's couldn't make a contract with a customer for MacDonald's to employ them at head office. I doubt the situation is any different with a prof and a student, legally (but not ethically) speaking.
@IanSudbery Really hard to know what interpretation a court would take on these details as it's very jurisdiction dependent and also depends on the standard practices and reasonable expectations people can have. This is why so many of us have recommended the OP speak to a local lawyer, preferably via a union as they'll have more specific knowledge of local case law on this.
@StephenG Well, I'd definately always recommend joining and using a union if one is available.
@IanSudbery If the contract is not valid for the reason you state, might the student have a case of fraud against the professor? He presented himself as a representative of the university with the power to hire and pay people. If the student does not in fact have a contract with the university, then it would seem that the professor's indication that he had the power to make that contract was fraudulent in the first place. I'd have no recourse against McDonald's for someone who pretends to enter into contracts on their behalf, but I'd expect to have recourse against that person.
@NuclearWang - That would be hard to call fraud unless the professor explicitly said that the university would pay the student. In the absence of such an explicit statement it could also be interpreted as a private contract between the professor and student (outsourcing the work, essentially), forcing the professor to pay out of his own pocket.
@IanSudbery A professor can absolutely be an employer. The professor can have problems getting the university to pay his employee, which means he or she would have to pay the employee out of their own pocket. Most professors are wise enough to avoid that situation. And the way this particular contract is described, I see no indication that the university would be involved in any way.
@NuclearWang: (for jurisdiction Germany) the student has the right to get fulfillment of the contract or damages. From the professor, if there was no valid contract with the university. However, there may actually be a valid contract with the university here - this would depend on the details. E.g. if the university has let the professor hire students in a similar manner before, that would count as the university granting the professor the power to hire on their behalf.
tl;dr: Try your local small claims court or arbitration service to claim your salary, and make a formal complaint to your university regarding the professor's threat.
Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, I'm an academic too. Try to look up guidelines specific to your jurisdiction. Don't worry about what may be common in academia. Pay disputes are very common in every field of life, and your situation isn't that different to if a car wash or a restaurant tried not to pay you for work already completed.
The full answer
There are two issues here - firstly getting the money you are owed, and secondly dealing with your professor's threat of retaliation.
Although the exact processed will vary from country to country, I would suggest this as a somewhat universal blueprint to get the money you are owed.
Compile all evidence in writing. Make an annotated PDF of all the emails where your agreement is mentioned. Email people who were present at the meeting when you agreed the hourly rate, asking "Hey, just sorting out some project stuff. You were there when I set an hourly rate if X Euros with professor Y. Just wanted to check you remember that this was the amount we agreed on." From their replies, you now have evidence of the oral agreement in writing too.
Email a formal final request for payment to your professor. Keep it brief (don't go into your whole dispute), and include payment details and a date by when you expect payment.
If the professor still refuses to pay, file a claim with your local small claims court or arbitration service. Small pay disputes are very common, and these kinds of services are designed to be cheap and efficient to use. For example, in the UK the fee to submit a claim is ~20GBP. Evidence (i.e. your annotated set of emails) is submitted online to an arbiter who will try to reach an agreement between the parties. No need for lawyers, and most cases can be resolved online or by phone, with no need to go into a court. In general you won't have the opportunity to call witnesses in this kind of arbitration, so make sure you have all your evidence (including the emails from witnesses) in a PDF or on paper.
The threat of academic retaliation by your professor is another issue, and a very serious one. Was this threat made in writing? If so, I would immediately make a formal complaint to the university. This will pre-empt any possible retaliation on the professor's part. If the threat was not made in writing, you may not want to make a complaint at this stage - however by formally pursuing the money you are owed, you will have demonstrated that he has a conflict of interest if he ever does decide to make a complaint against you.
In the UK specifically, to initiate a case like this you must go through the ACAS service (Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service). They have a very helpful phoneline you can phone to be guided through the process. They'll also be able to tell you exactly what the law is as it relates to the case.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.484355 | 2020-06-24T08:25:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/150951",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"CCTO",
"Chris H",
"Deepak",
"Ian Sudbery",
"Jack Aidley",
"Make42",
"Matteo Ferla",
"Nuclear Hoagie",
"Our",
"ProgrammingLlama",
"SnakeDoc",
"StephenG - Help Ukraine",
"Tommi",
"Valorum",
"bta",
"cag51",
"cbeleites",
"eagle275",
"gnasher729",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116232",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21493",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32274",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34226",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39222",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41788",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43199",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/47571",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51585",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5614",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63664",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75098",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82972",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87460",
"user347489"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
157672 | Why say source code is available with an ArXiv paper when it is not?
I sometimes come across ArXiv papers where the authors claim the source code for the project discussed can be obtained, but on checking the link provided the source code comprises no more than a place holder. So the code is not available, and on subsequent checking months later (in case the authors were in a rush to publish the paper before the code was quite ready to release) the code is still unavailable.
Now I understand there is no obligation to provide source code with commercial potential, unless maybe the project was subsidized with public funds. But what do authors have to gain by claiming it is available when it is not actually available?
The question has been edited according to the comments and this conversation has been moved to chat.
There is no advantage to claiming the source code is available and then not doing that. All it will achieve is irritating the really interested readers.
The most likely reason is it’s a simple mistake. Something like they wanted to do that but forgot. Or other reasons, maybe department policies came up that prevented the author from doing that. Or maybe the author found another more suitable place to publish the code and forgot to update the link in the paper. Or...
The simplest solution is to contact the author directly.
or, LaTeX mangled the link, since it contained a tilde character, a percent character or something similar... lots of stupid issues can be blamed on technology.
There is an obvious and self-evident advantage, which is that the paper gets into a journal mandating open data, without actually making your data open. Contrary to what might be projected many, many scientists see advantage in hiding their data
Or the link just had a typo in it or the author forget to hit "publish" on the source code.
@benxyzzy: Is that based on concrete personal experience, and if so, in what field? At least in my field (pure math/theoretical CS — so not much experimental data, but lots of code) I’ve really never seen anyone who seemed to be trying to hide their code. And I don’t think I’m saying that out of idealistic naïvety: I’m aware of plenty of other academic sins happening in my field (plagiarism, ghost authorships, clear and deliberate salami-slicing, and so on), but I’ve never seen anything that seemed like dishonestly/inappropriately hiding code.
I've come across machine learning papers with links to Github repos that I cannot access on a not infrequent basis. It's not clear to me why - it could be the owner inadvertently set it private, or have made it private at some stage since the paper was published, or created the repo as a placeholder and never got around to populating it. It's quite frustrating to be honest.
I don't know about arXiv, but on bioarXiv, people will often upload their manuscripts at the same time as they submit them for peer review. People will put in links for data and code that they intend to make available when the peer-reviewed form of the manuscript is published.
Some times this is because they want to protect their data/code until the last possible minute. Other times they tell themselves they'll get round to sorting it out before the peer reviewed form is published, but then forget.
Note: I am saying what happens. I'm definitely not saying this is good or acceptable practice.
I think what they should have written is that "it will be available upon publication". Many people will provide the source code only after the paper is published. It is possible they intended to release the code upon publication, and they may need to get approval from their funding source etc. They should use proper language though.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.485946 | 2020-10-15T18:48:32 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/157672",
"authors": [
"David Waterworth",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"PLL",
"Per Alexandersson",
"Rob",
"benxyzzy",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111536",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1277",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15465",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2794",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74658"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
203121 | Why am I requested to compile my figure files with 300 DPI?
I will submit an article to Geoscientific Model Development, and the submission instructions requests that I ensure that my figure files are "compiled as *.pdf, *.ps, *.eps, *.jpg, *.png, or *.tif files with a resolution of 300 dpi" before I submit the manuscript for peer review.
What does it mean in practice that my figure files are compiled with a resolution of 300 DPI? How is this relevant when it comes to PNG and PDF files? Do the DPIs of PNG and PDF files have any effect on the final document, and is this even information that is stored in such files?
I know what DPI is and the difference between a raster and a vector image. That's not the issue.
In my experience when people say to use 300 dpi what they really mean is use a high resolution image suitable for printing and not a lower resolution suitable for web or screen.
Don't forget that PDF can contain raster data instead/as well as vector data. So can SVG and probably EPS. This is typically used for annotated photos
PDFs store information about the physical size of the pages they contain. You probably don't realize it because almost every PDF says "I'm 8.5x11" on every page (or whatever the standard outside-the-US size is, I guess), so you never noticed it had the capability. Once you know it has an intended physical size, DPI is a perfectly cromulent thing to talk about again.
PNG files are pixel graphics. The requirement simply says that you need to include pictures in PNG format that have a sufficiently high resolution so that they don't look "pixely". In other words, you shouldn't include a 100x100 pixel picture and display it in a figure that covers half a page. (But if that is an inset that shows up in a 5x5 mm area, then 100x100 pixels are enough because that equates to ~500 DPI.)
Thank you for your answer; I guess that makes sense. So when they write DPI, it sounds like what they probably mean is the number of pixels per inch on a printed version of the paper (which wouldn't be a property of the image itself, but rather its resolution in combination with how it is displayed in the document)?
@HelloGoodbye Yes, that's exactly how this should be interpreted. It isn't a property of the image itself, but the number of pixels and how large you make that image on the page and how large the page is.
@HelloGoodbye DPI is an abbreviation that means 'dots per inch'. It is a measure telling you how detailed or grainy/ pixely a picture will be at a certain size.
@quarague I know what DPI stands for. So if it is a measure telling you how detailed or grainy/ pixely a picture will be at a certain size, then what is that size for a PNG image?
Note that PNGs do have a method to store DPI information. Of course, in reality the DPI depends on how the image is scaled. But it's possible that the publisher is checking this information in the PNG.
@HelloGoodbye It is the same thing. If you need 300DPI then if you are adding a 1 inch by 1 inch picture to the page the PNG file needs to be at least 300 pixels by 300 pixels to meet that requirement. If you want a 10 inch by 10 inch image then you need at least 3000 x 3000 pixels.
@HelloGoodbye It's not the size of the png per se. It's the size of the png on the page. FYI 300 dpi is the general standard for magazines. Newspapers generally print at 150 dpi. 600 dpi is high quality art prints such as posters or glossy art magazines.
@HelloGoodbye FWIW A4 paper is 8.3 inches wide so a full-width image is roughly 2500 pixels wide (300 x 8.3 = 2490). That's just a bit wider than a 4k image. Basically a 4k image is just under half an A4 paper at 300 dpi.
Well, the instructions are a bit old-school. They have the underlying assumption that you submit your figure files in exactly the size they are printed and they want the resolution of any pixel content of the final paper to be 300 dpi. Of course, in modern typesetting, you can embed any figure at any size. So the instructions translate to: If your figures are embedded at a reasonable size in the final paper, any pixel content should be 300 dpi.
All of this in turn hardly ever matters if you follow the other guideline, which says:
The first choice should be vector graphics
… and for vector graphics, you do not have pixel content in the first place. So, if this is about plots, diagrams, etc., just deliver them in a vector format.
Now, depending on the subject of your research, you may have photographs and similar, but here you cannot control the resolution at this point and are stuck with what you have (see: Is increasing the DPI of a low resolution image a good idea?).
The only case in which you should worry about this guideline is if you have some content that needs to be rendered to pixels and you can control the resolution of the rendering.
Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.
DPI matters for raster graphics, which encode individual pixels. This is to be contrasted with vector graphics file which contain information about shapes. Some formats, like PDF, can contain both raster and vector graphics. PNG is purely a raster graphics format. Too low DPI for raster graphics will look bad if the journal increases the size of the figure. 300 DPI is a common minimum guideline for raster images, but it's generally better to create vector graphics whenever possible.
But is DPI even a property of a PNG file? Isn't what actually matters the resolution of it (i.e., its width and height in pixels)?
@HelloGoodbye - you do need to be sure there are enough pixels to be able to make a reasonably sized figure out of, assuming it will be printed at around 300 DPI. It needs to be a Figure, not a desktop icon.
@JonCuster Thanks. I figured that must have been the case.
@HelloGoodbye There are two parts to the answer. 1. The DPI that actually matters for publishing just depends on the number of pixels and the size in which the image is shown in the article, which has its own physical dimensions. 2. The technical part is that DPI is often, but not always, a property of PNG files. The file format specifies the data is organized into various chunks. The so called "pHYs" chunk has three fields. The first two specify the number of pixels per unit along the X and Y axes, giving the aspect ratio.
@HelloGoodbye The third field has value 1 if the unit used is one meter, or value 0 if the unit is unknown. So if the value is 1, there is a specified DPI, and thus the size of the figure is known. If the value is 0, there is no information about the physical size in the PNG file itself. Of course, as per the first part, this physical size is likely to be overridden when you include the PNG into your document.
Thanks for your elaborate explanation! I also figured out that even if the PNG file has a physical size and DPI, those are going to be overriden anyway when I include the PNG in my document. So what does it matter if I compile my PNG images with a resolution of 300 DPI, which the instructions tells me to do?
@HelloGoodbye What do you mean "going to be overridden"? The journal needs the figures in a certain resolution; if you're using software that's scaling them less than that resolution then this is your problem that you need to solve.
@BryanKrause what I mean by overridden is that once the image is inserted into the document, it is still going to get a new size, which will give it a DPI that depends on the figure size and the resolution of the PNG file, and not of the size and DPI of the PNG file. So the size and DPI file won’t have any effect at all on the final document.
@BryanKrause That the journal needs the figures in a certain resolution it’s not what they write; they write that they need them in a certain DPI, which is independent of the resolution.
@HelloGoodbye You should be producing the figures at the size that they will appear as well as the minimum DPI required.
Prefer vector graphics. If you plot using e.g. Matplotlib, then simply outputting a PDF file does the trick in most cases:
fig, ax = plt.subplots()
...
fig.savefig("figure.pdf")
If it must be a PNG file, ensure that it has sufficient pixels to meet the target print DPI and print width. That is, given:
# An 8 inch wide figure at 300 DPI requires 2400 pixels.
print_dpi = 300
print_width_inches = 8
print_width_pixels = print_width_inches * print_dpi
# Your PNG file.
file_dpi = ...
file_width_inches = ...
file_width_pixels = file_width_inches * file_dpi
The following condition must be satisfied:
assert file_width_pixels >= print_width_pixels
What really matters is if you have the number of pixels needed, file_width_pixels (e.g. 2400 pixels wide).
As long as you create a figure with enough pixels, you are good.
The other settings (file_dpi, file_width_inches) can be chosen arbitrarily to match this constraint, and don't really matter.
In fact, you can easily convert an image with "1 DPI" in the metadata field into a "9000 DPI" image with the following command:
exiftool -XResolution=9000 -YResolution=9000 figure.png
This command neither adds nor removes the only things that are actually important: the pixels. For comparison:
Image A
Image B
file_dpi = 1
file_dpi = 9000
file_width_pixels = 234
file_width_pixels = 234
Clearly, both images are exactly 234 pixels wide, and thus have the exact same quality. The DPI metadata is irrelevant. Look at the number of pixels, not the supposed DPI.
Regarding Matplotlib again, you may generate the appropriately sized PNG via:
fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(file_width_inches, file_height_inches), dpi=file_dpi)
...
fig.savefig("figure.png")
Again, the file_dpi does not need to be 300 in order to produce a high quality image. (e.g., file_width_inches=10000000000000, dpi=1 is a perfectly valid choice from the publisher's point of view, though your fonts will be very, very tiny, and your computer may not have enough memory for an image with higher resolution than images from the Hubble Space Telescope. :))
In some way or other, you will not only submit your images (say, a PNG graphic that is 600 pixels wide and 200 pixels high), but also layout "instructions" where and how big to put that image on a page of (ultimately) paper. If these instructions amount to "as wide as two text columns", then those text columns better be no wider than one inch each, because at 300 dpi, your 600 pixels are good only for 2 inches.
If the numbers don't match, your options are to decide that the image shall appear smaller in size (and thereby less impressive, or perhaps your important 3-by-3 pixel markings become almost invisible to the naked eye) or you try to render it at higher pixel resolution.
Technically you can rescale.
I always understood this as a hint to check if your figures are going to look as you desire if they are scaled to the planned size and rendered at 300dpi.
That could affect:
rastered graphics (which you may like to represent in an integer multiple to avoid fuzzy edges)
minimum line widths/usage of different line widths to indicate data traces in plots
filling patterns
marker types which you use in plots
potentially fonts/sizes which you use (-> font hinting)
checking if gray values can be represented appropriately by the raster (300dpi is the B/W resolution, not the resolution in which you can represent a gray value)
The other point which I always understood implied was an polite version of "please don't send a 1200x1200 resolution rasterized graphics".
Thanks for you answer, Sasha! Do you mean that I should scale them in the document so that they get a size that equals the resolution of the PNG file divided by 300 DPI (or rather 300 PPI to get the correct unit) to see what they look like? That is, if I have a 900x600 pixel PNG, I should scale it so that it has a size of 900x600 pixels / (300 pixels/inch) = 3x2 inches in the document?
This sounds like more of a question for Google than for Academia Stack Exchange, but since preparing figures for the final manuscript and typesetting is always a hassle (would love to hear from anyone who thinks it isn't), here are my two cents:
Anything that is printed will need a higher resolution than something on screen. For example, powerpoint files generally work with a screen resolution of 72 dpi because all they are meant for is to be projected. If you don't want your images to look pixelated in print, you need to ensure they have a resolution of at least 300 dpi. That's just how printing works.
Familiarize yourself with this and differences between vector and raster images - there is lots of information out there online, also through printshops etc. because the same thing holds for printing posters for conferences.
In general, what helps is to prepare your figures at the real (i.e. actual, final) print size. That way you can ensure (by doing test prints yourself) that everything is up to par while preparing the figures.
Save .png for the web, .jpg for test prints/first submissions and always make sure you have high resolution files (.eps, .tif) for final submission. There will always be loss of data when you export as .png and .jpg because there is compression and loss of data (which is why the file sizes are smaller - and we like that until the publisher informs us that the resolution of our images is too low).
Of course any of this may become obsolete in a paperless world, but this is not the reality we live in so it helps to think of eventual printing at all times and to make sure that your raw files and source material do(es) have the right resolution and/or can be exported as such.
Hi BioBrains; thanks for your reply. I think my question was a bit unclear. I know what DPI is, and the difference between raster and vector images. My confusion is that I have never seen that PNG images or PDF documents can have DPI before, so I don't understand what it means to compile a PNG image or PDF file with 300 DPI. Furthermore, even if a PNG image would have a DPI on its own, the figure in the document that uses that PNG image will still have a DPI that only depends on the figure size and the resolution of the PNG file, and will therefore be independent of the DPI of the PNG file.
Hence my question how it is relevant what DPI I compile my PNG images with.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.486401 | 2023-10-20T15:25:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/203121",
"authors": [
"Anyon",
"Bryan Krause",
"Chris H",
"Daniel Wagner",
"HelloGoodbye",
"Jon Custer",
"Michael Mior",
"NathanOliver",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"barbecue",
"cag51",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/115668",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15998",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17254",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/174450",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23999",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28605",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39354",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45349",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8494",
"quarague",
"slebetman"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
73669 | How to ask what my salary will be for German PhD position
I am a biomedical engineer; I was offered a PhD position in Germany. They already prepared my contract but never mentioned my salary. I was wondering if there is a polite way to ask how much will be my salary.
So you were ready to sign without even knowing how much (or even IF) you were going to be paid? You are not asking whether you will make 50000€ or 65000€ a month! You are (basically) asking how much you can spend for a flat, for food, for the university... and everyone will understand that. I understand, because I am a really shy person, but you need to know.
@SteffX I don't know where you are from, but in job postings in the Netherlands (which is not Germany), this is not always listed, and especially for PhD positions it is a bit useless, because all first year PhD student will earn the same amount, there is a collective agreement.
People surprise me every day. How can you even consider any position without knowing what will you get in return? Phd is not a slavery (also in a lot of cases it is similar if to compare with a reasonable job), so you should start it only if it is beneficial for you.
I still did not sign any contract , obviously ! :) My supervisor was not able tell me how much my salary will be during the interview. That was the "problem " . Anyway I contacted the HR and they , hopefully , will give me some advice. Thank you again.
@Nick: If that's a university position, be aware that HR might not have the slightest idea - funding (i.e. the discovery and combination of funding sources) is something managed by individual institutes or groups thereof, and if the professor doesn't know yet, chances are that is because he or she is not yet sure about whether some upcoming funding opportunities will actually be available.
They will not tell you a number in Euro, as the person tasked with the hiring decision probably doesn't know the amount either. You need to ask for the paygrade and then use the calculator on this page to find the amount.
It is a very easy conversation, because neither you nor your supervisor can do anything about the payment. No negotiation, no decision making, nothing involved. You cannot say anything wrong (as in, reduce your chances for a good salary).
How to calculate the amount from the paygrade
First, you need to know which tarif applies to you. On the page I linked, choose "TVL West" if you will work in a state of former West Germany, and "TVL Ost" if you are in former East Germany. You will see a blue calculator form in the upper right corner.
The paygrade information your boss tells you will be of the form "E13, 50%". It may have been printed on the job ad, but not always.
E13 is the "level" determined by the job's difficulty, and is fixed for the position. The rules here are so firm, I don't know if it is even possible to have a PhD research job ("wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter") at any other level than E13.
The percentage is the worktime percentage paid. It is up to the institution to decide if they are going to pay you full time, half time, or some other fraction. Paid full time is practically unheard of outside of computer science departments, biomedical should be 50% or some more. The actual time your boss expects you to be present in the office may be different from what your contract says, and it is also up to your supervisor and work to know if you will need to put in some unpaid extra hours outside of fulltime work hours. If you have a cell culture which needs to be fed every day, you might find yourself coming back to the lab on weekends too. But the money you get depends on the number in the contract, and it is simply calculated as a proportion of the money for the full time.
The calculator also asks you for a Stufe. It refers to a pay "raise" based on years of work experience. If you are a freshly minted M. Sc., you start at "1", get upgraded to "2" after one year in 1, then to 3 after two years in 2, etc, up to 6. If you have worked somewhere else before and gained relevant experience (HR judges what is relevant), you can get into a higher group, but not higher than 3 when you are changing institutions, or when you are changing the E level within the same institution.
If you are single, your "Steuerklasse" (tax classification) is I. If you are married, try "IV" for the first calculation. If you are in a civil union with a same sex partner, that also counts, but I don't know how difficult it is to get a civil union or same sex marriage from another country recognized in Germany.
You will get some extra money if you have small children, but I don't know which ages count for how much.
If you are either Catholic or Protestant, you will also pay a church tax. For this, choose the link behind "Kirchensteuer" and enter the state in which you will be working.
Leave everything else at default for the calculation, and press "berechnen".
For example: in my institution, a biology PhD always gets a 50% E13 contract, and assuming he is single, atheist and has no previous work experience, this translates to 1758.68 €, of which he takes home 1208.12 €.
Beside the Stufe for years worked, your salary will rise a little bit every year, as the whole paygrade is adjusted in a negotiation on the highest level between the provinces' governments and the trade unions. You cannot get a pay raise by negotiating with your boss, nor could he give you one if he wanted. The exception would be giving you a few more percent worktime, if you are not already at 100% and if your institution's policy allows it. This is rare and will likely require you to take on one more project beside your PhD work.
An additional payment in December is customary, but it is not as high as a regular monthly salary.
It is incorrect to say that nothing can be done. If the candidate has previous work experience, or unique skills that are not generally available, a case can be made for increasing the "step" in the TV-L 13 scale. However, doing so comes at the cost of not getting salary step increases until the level is "naturally" reached. As an example, someone starting at TV-L 13 Step 3 would have to wait six years instead of three to bump up to TV-L 13 Step 4.
@aeismail This is not what I have experienced. First, the "step" in the cases I have seen is determined by HR, I have seen supervisors or Betriebsraete trying to influence it and failing. Second, the "waiting" for advance cannot be a firm rule, or maybe it has changed in the past. I personally started a job at 3 (taking my step from my old job) and advanced after 3 years. No negotiations involved, that's how HR and the accountants did it - and they never give more money if they are allowed to give less.
@aeismail I'm TV-L 13 and I get regular adjustments. Maybe these are not the big "scale" jumps, but simply inflation-related adjustments.
@Federico this is something very different from raises you can get (or not get) by talking to your advisor.
@rumtscho yes, I agree. I simply wanted to say that the salary is not completely "frozen" for 6 years, contrary to what I understood by reading aeismail's comment.
@Federico: You get annual cost-of-living adjustments, but not a jump in the "Step," which is a bit larger.
@Roland: If you have industrial research experience (particularly if you're coming from overseas, this is possible), then you can qualify to move upwards.
Just ask, there's nothing wrong about it. From what I know, PhD students in Germany are paid some fraction of the 'TV-L 13' bracket, about 50-70%.
100% correspond to 3438€ / month. See link (german).
I'd rather calculate with 50 % (almost all PhD students I know have 50 or 60 % contracts). That corresponds to 1200 - 1450 € net (= after compulsory social insurance and income tax are subtracted) per month.
1150€ is what I was told.
@cbeleites That also depends largely on the major. In Computer Science it's not unheard to get 80% as well. That's probably one of the best majors to be in though from a monetary point of view. In general I'd be surprised if that wasn't mentioned anywhere in the job offer though.
Engineers normally get 100% of the TV-L.
@aeismail♦ Really? Where? From what I've heard, in Kiel, electrical engineers get regularly 60% of TV-L.
Anecdotal: when I was a PhD 100% was the norm (computer science) for students directly employed by the university. Of course there were also different agreements in place (stipends, industry or private funding etc.). So a PhD's salary can depend on many factors. But some fraction of E13 is a good estimate. For what it's worth, I've heard of PhD students "sharing" a 50% E13 position, so essentially receiving a 25% E13 salary...
@AndrejaKo: E.g. University of Stuttgart, depending on the institute. I am an aerospace engineer and was offered a 100% position for a PhD (aircraft systems development), two friends of mine (mechanical engineering) have 100% PhD position (research on gearboxes).
True some get more, but: AFAIK, 60% is the current DFG recommendation. And personally, I prefer calculating with lower wage and then getting more rather than the other way round. (50 - 60% is what I know mostly for biologists, chemists, physicists and optical engineers for projects that are typically related to medical diagnostics).
@cbeleites: Engineers get more so that the offer can be moderately competitive with what they can make on the regular job market. The economics are different for students in the sciences.
@aeismail: I know - though I believe that would be better described as "do make on the regular job market": chemists have very good entry wages as well, but 90 % go for a PhD and do not even consider looking for a job directly whereas PhD is more rare for the engineers I know. However, a "biomedical engineer" may very well end up doing their PhD in a "part-time wage" institute. Anyways, let's not get too far off-topic: the usual range is well covered in answer and comments.
Just ask, using polite words. You're over-thinking this.
Some people have social anxiety or Autism Spectrum disorder, and to them it can be difficult to visualize people's reactions. They may be afraid of their polite words being nevertheless perceived as greedy or rude due to social norms they cannot see. It is likely that OP is not in Germany, and therefore not a native speaker of German (if he were, he would not have mentioned Germany), so there may be some language issues as well. I don't think you're being fair to him.
@EMBLEM You're over thinking it.
@EMBLEM Those are fair points. However, the asker doesn't mention language being an issue so it seems reasonable to assume that either they speak good enough German or they're happy to ask the question in English (German scientists speak impeccable English). Any reasonable boss will understand that somebody from another culture might make cultural mistakes and will see that the request was well-intended, even if it was accidentally rude. Also, knowing what your salary is going to be is a fundamental part of accepting any position: it would be crazy to object to somebody asking about that.
Congrats on the position!
I'm not sure how it works in Germany (and perhaps I am wrong since other answers talk about "grades"), but in the UK we often call it "funding" rather than "salary" since the money typically comes from research councils rather than the university itself. Some PhD positions come with funding, some do not, so for me it is completely acceptable to ask.
As a PhD student myself, I would feel much more comfortable asking "will there be any funding available for this position?" rather than "what's my salary?". Hope this helps.
This is not a valid answer in the context of Germany. PhD students are employees, and thus receive a salary.
I think this is a good answer for a different question. For what it's worth, in Germany, it is called "salary", and it does typically come from the university (or rather, from a state agency that pays salaries to all civil servants, including university employees on behalf of the university). It is possible that the money originally comes from some research funding (as in, funding for a specific grant), but it is also possible the money comes from the regular budget of the institute.
Ah, fair enough!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.487954 | 2016-08-03T10:48:01 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/73669",
"authors": [
"ALISON GONZALEZ-ORTIZ",
"Ali",
"Alyssa Kacmarek",
"AndrejaKo",
"Bernhard",
"Cape Code",
"Cristian Malnero",
"David Richerby",
"EMBLEM",
"Elite Book Publish",
"Federico",
"Greg Dalziel",
"Happy Boi",
"Insane",
"Jannet Chagoya-Romo",
"Jayden Student",
"Jens Tierling",
"Jovriel Reyes",
"Khatri Brothers",
"Khiara Brown",
"Luana Batista Moraes",
"Nick",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Salvador Dali",
"Simisola Akinsunmi",
"Stefan Mesken",
"SteffX",
"Tobias",
"Voo",
"aeismail",
"cbeleites",
"dasdingonesin",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10685",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208031",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208032",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208034",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208059",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208098",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208102",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208103",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/208105",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209284",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/209300",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33221",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41625",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44775",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57083",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58921",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58942",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58967",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/59979",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/59989",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/60024",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7096",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9621",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9653",
"rumtscho"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
124177 | Is combinatorial novelty without insight useful? Who cares if we're the first to use tool T on problem P?
I'm a bioinformatician and former student of applied math. I want help to see if I should change my view).
Many academics, including all of my PI's on my major projects, justify their work by saying "We're the first ones to apply fashionable technique T on problem P". This is in situations where P is often well-studied and T was developed and established by other groups. I call it "combinatorial novelty" in the title because the novelty is not in new tools, nor new insights, but rather in new combinations. The justification is essentially "We're early adopters."
This would be fine if the studies produced valuable new insight about P. P is important and I'd be proud to make progress on it whether or not I'm using fancy new techniques like T. But usually, our progress on P is weak despite using T, so we need to turn to T's fanciness to justify our work. I see people using this "combinatorial novelty" to make their work seem like a big deal.
This seems flimsy, but if every PI I've worked under is doing it, then either it impresses grant reviewers, or it actually is valuable to science and I just don't understand why. Or both. Is this valuable to science? If so, why?
This feels to me more like a rant than a real question (though I think the answers are helpful to you), and I think it's also using a bit of a straw man argument. I often read papers that tout what you term 'combinatorial novelty' of their approach. I rarely, if ever, see papers where that is the primary or sole justification published in high-impact journals.
if you use the "CMV" tag, then perhaps you may want to replace "good point" and "+1" with "Δ" :P
@BryanKrause It feels like a rant to me too, but the answerers seem to have real answers. You comment is informative to me as well: "I rarely, if ever, see papers where that is the primary or sole justification published in high-impact journals." So would you say it's typically not enough except as a means to an end?
@burneraccount Not sure what you mean as a 'means to an end' but my personal opinion is that all science that is done should be publishable, regardless of impact. I felt like your question implied that you think people are using these justifications to make their work seem like a 'big deal' when they may be simply explaining what they did. Negative/uninteresting findings can still be very important, as the answers have noted.
Not enough for an answer, but I would imagine that if your team thought T might work on P, and decided to spend time and money finding that out, some other team might feel the same way in the future. If you publish your results, the other team(s) may decide to spend their time on money on different avenues of science, instead of carrying out the same experiment.
@BryanKrause When you say "I felt like your question implied that you think people are using these justifications to make their work seem like a 'big deal'", that hits the nail on the head. That is exactly what I see people doing. I will edit my rant to make this clear.
@burneraccount I think that's where you are wrong, then. Those parts of the papers aren't saying it's a big deal, they are just saying why the work was done. If I was going to tell you how I spent this morning, and I told you I took a shower and put on pants, and that I did those things to not smell bad and to have warm legs, I would be saying that to tell you what I did, not to claim it's a big deal. Incremental work is incremental work.
Is there some probability ex ante that applying T to P could generate new insights?
@henning In many cases that motivated this question, yes. In others, no.
Hmm, there is some nominal research value. If you publish results saying "This combination doesn't produce anything novel or unexpected", then you may be saving dozens, or even hundreds of other researchers the time to do it themselves. And that time they saved could possibly be used in other areas of research that are unexplored. Think of it as narrowing down many paths to fewer, increasing the odds that someone else might take the right path.
I suggest removing the words "without insight" from the question title.
Is this valuable to science? If so, why?
Because it leads us to understand if tool T works on problem B. How big the "insight" that we gain from this is depends a lot on how different T is to other tools that have already been used on B, or, conversely, how different B is from other problems that T has been applied to.
The range here goes from "it is mind-blowing that T could work on B" all the way to "meh, everybody knew that T would work because we use it all the time for B' anyway" - although I will grant that most works following this schema in practice end up more on the rather incremental side of things.
Good point. I think in my situation, the takeaway is usually "Too bad T didn't tell us as much about P as we hoped." But the paper is usually still pitched as "Look how cool T is!" So there is a disconnect between the rhetoric about T and the true value as seen by this question. Thanks for helping me think this through.
@CJ59, then maybe the tattoo should say something different.
@burneraccount are you saying that there's a disconnect between the motto of science and the way the motto should be presented to people?
No, I was just a joking.
I think this is difficult to answer in general. While it is probably not very valuable to apply random technique A to random problem B, it is also useful to find new ways to explore existing problems. Sometimes this "insight" is just that a tool from some other domain might be used to generate additional insight. For example, finding a new way to prove an old theorem in mathematics is often (not always) valuable as the new proof may, itself, offer insights.
So yes, valuable. So no, not so valuable. But it depends. It would be valuable if it helps other researchers get more insight into a field in general, not just into the problem at hand. But throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks is just throwing stuff at the wall.
+1 For "It would be valuable if it helps other researchers get more insight into a field in general, not just into the problem at hand."
I’m more familiar with the final adage in the form “Throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks is just feeding the paint industry”. :-þ
This would be fine if the studies produced valuable new insight about P
New insight isn't the only important thing in research. Many types of research have resource limits, including manpower, equipment costs, computing resources, etc. If applying technique T to problem P reduces resource requirements, despite giving the exact same results, that can have profound impacts on future research, whether it's being able to increase sample sizes, free up money for other equipment, or being able to do things at a larger scale or finer granularity. This in turn also makes it more feasible for smaller research groups to start tackling the same problem when they couldn't before because of limited resources.
I think your gut impression is likely correct. If P and T are relatively well known than there is little value (other than for a new student in his learning) in applying one to the other. For instance, using sophisticated crystallography software to solve a crystal structure that was already done correctly using direct methods.
I am very much a fan of datapoint science. But ideally, you can do something new (make a new compound, find a boiling point, do a correlation of response to a medical treatment, etc.) In other words I am fine with "stamp collecting". But T on P sounds a bit weak. There are so many cool things to look at, you would think these guys could get a little more novelty (even moderate things).
I'm even sympathetic to some "negative" results. But it sounds like these guys are milking things. And then the gushy wording...but don't get me started on hype scientists.
I think you have the right instinct. I would just try to figure out something a little bit more interesting. Doesn't need to be discovering gravity. But in your own work, do a little more.
The wording you use is "Combinatorial Novelty". Interesting choice of words.
First, I guess you admit that there is indeed novelty to a work of such kind. And novelty is an important part of academic work. In order for knowledge to progress, new things need to be tried and invented. In academic medium, you also need to either make clear what your innovations are and if you aren't innovating you better cite the original source.
I myself look down on anyone who claims that he/she/his group/his company is "the first to...", since in the modern world you require lots of concessions and particularities before indeed you can make such claim. Example : "Our company is the first one to apply this research with only partial public funding into a product released in this region with academic and government advisers". If I hear this, I'm pretty sure someone else already did the thing, in slightly but not meaningfully different conditions. I'm also guessing whoever says this stuff is trying to trick a reporter into writing "this company is the first to develop a product with this technology".
Note that your combinatorial novelty is usually far from the scenario above. Also that unlike reporters and marketing departments, researchers usually report much more honestly and are reviewed with more care.
Of course, there is much less glory to applying a known technique from other fields into a new context than there is to developing a completely knew technique. Then again, what is more important? Glory and effort or results? If the technique you've borrowed heavily improves the state of the art in the field you work, how would you have found this out if not by trying to apply it? And since you've gone through the effort of learning, implementing and applying a new technique, then publish the damn results!
In mathematics it happens that a same technique is rediscovered over and over again by researchers in different fields because said researchers really needed these techniques in the fields they were working (Least Squares method is the example that comes to mind), usually this is restricted to simpler techniques, but imagine a method that would require thousands of lines of code to implement, do you really believe it becomes something so specific it has no further use? Do you think it would be efficient for everyone to develop their own brand of this procedure just to have authorship?
There are indeed cases when you might think in advance that a certain technique will surely not improve anything, but likewise, you sometimes have an idea that you think will be a great advancement, but you discover not to be an improvement at all. When that happens, you probably recognize that it was a worthy attempt. But if you were using a technique from other fields you might trick your self into believing that you knew the idea was bad all along.
Also, remember that people in academic careers don't always find new exciting results every day, maybe not every year, maybe not every decade. Yet, masters and PhDs and post docs need to be completed in their respective time constraints. It's good that we have methods that reliably generate novelty in a limited time frame. It's also good that something can be done to advance an academic career that could be otherwise halted. It's "better than nothing".
It is also important to compare between methods, such that a reference methodology can emerge in certain fields. Sometimes it is the "state of the art technique", sometime its just the "sanity check" one. For portfolio management theory, Markowitz model can be used as a broad reference for comparing against improvements, while constant ratio portfolio usually provides a good comparison. For a research team to develop these kinds of references it is also important to address the same problems with different tools and cultivate a tradition over it.
However, no research team should restrict itself to doing only that. And after the simple combinatoric is done and a novelty is published, some effort should be dedicated to tweak methods, adapt techniques such that some new meaningful advancement is at least consciously attempted, rather than stumbled upon by luck.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.489063 | 2019-02-01T14:03:54 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/124177",
"authors": [
"Bryan Krause",
"Issel",
"Janus Bahs Jacquet",
"John Dvorak",
"Ooker",
"Tommi",
"Xantix",
"burner account",
"henning no longer feeds AI",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/103871",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14341",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31917",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57221",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8420"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
112401 | Importance of professional website to search committees
I am hitting the academic job market this fall and was advised to have a professional website, but I am completely lost in putting this advice into action. I now am sitting here thinking about making a professional website in preparation of the job market. I am uncomfortable with this kind of self-promotion but, on the other hand, I do not want to ignore a low hanging piece of fruit because I don't like its shape.
My questions are:
Do professional websites enhance the application for potentials?
How much does the professional website matter at this stage in my career?
Is it worth time writing up my own webpage or is sticking to prefabs like weebly good enough?
Background: My field is in the social sciences, though my area of research is computational within it. My publication record upon finishing my postdoc will be strong. I am exceptionally uncomfortable with the idea of self-promotion or even engaging in social media conversations.
Any advice would be appreciated. My hope is that my research productivity will stand on its own and I will not have to create a professional website, but I hope you can advise me on how important it is.
A complete ORCID profile could matter more than a website.
As a social scientist I find it really irritating when people don’t have up to date websites. I don’t like relying on ResearchGate and similar...
For the record, I think social media presence and website presence are separate issues and should be separate questions. I see most of the answers are ignoring the social media side of your question.
Seconding @Dawn's comment, a professional web-site is an entirely different thing than social media stuff. Two wildly different images/facades, at least in this year...
The question How can I build reputation online as a programmer when my work is private? and its answers on The Workplace may be of interest -- addresses some aspects of whether an online presence is necessary (albeit for a different discipline).
OT, but of use for the OP: I am right now creating a place for Academic Researchers to easily create a website. It specifically addresses most of the concerns that I've seen on this page, and I'll update it with additional things that I see here. If the OP or anybody else from Academia.SE is interested, I can be contacted here.
Never mind that website, if you’re uncomfortable with self-promotion you’ll have a bad time on the academic job market.
There's very little self-promotion implied in a professional website, especially a spartan one. It's just a good way to unify your work output. For example, Google Scholar doesn't describe your research interests or list your current affiliation.
I look for and use the websites of job candidates all the time, and I know many of my colleagues do as well. The reason is that we can find things there that are not on your CV, for example:
Links to the PDF versions of your papers, if you put them there.
Links to pages that provide teaching materials for your students.
Numerous other things that belong on a website but can't be obtained through the CV itself.
So yes, do create a website. As @aeismail writes, take a look at the websites of your colleagues in the field, pick the ones you like best, then imitate that style.
What system you use -- handwritten HTML or a content management system -- is secondary to the content you put online.
I am a social scientist with a website and I definitely got hits ahead of interviews and especially ahead of campus visits. I also used it to keep copies of working paper and as a repository for replication data and code materials etc.
If you are somewhat technical, you can generate static HTML from Markdown. I do.
If the website is hosted on a university site (in the US), there may be constraints on the design as a result of the ADA. I know my university doesn't let arbitrary sites be posted without the use of their CMS.
@aeismail Which is a shame, because it presupposes that we as professors are incapable of generating §508/ADA-compliant websites, when it's actually not that hard (in fact, old-school webpages are more likely to be compliant than anything new-fangled). I can do custom HTML at my university, but I have to jump through a lot of hoops and it still loves to still add a little link to jump into the CMS (which I combat with a little JS to kill that div haha)
True, but there’s a secondary reason for the CMS—consistency in branding. If people want to host their own personal website, though, there’s no reason they can’t do that. There’s also the fact that we as faculty tend to forget about mobile access, when that is part of the design and now how the majority of web access actually takes place.
+1 This answer matches how I use the web when I need information about someone, whether for hiring or (for example) to prove to the higher administration that the person is a genuine expert whose letters of recommendation should be trusted. I prefer simple web sites where it's easy to find information. Make sure your site isn't a sloppy mess, and make sure it doesn't have so many fancy "features" that people can't find things.
The improvement in your chances is marginal but nonzero.
The reason for this is that the first thing people will do is read through your application package. If they can’t find a reason to advance your application further, they’re not going to bother checking out your website.
But if they do find something and want to learn more, having something available will be of some benefit.
It’s not hard to create a simple, functional website these days. Something that looks sufficiently “professional” for your discipline certainly cannot hurt your chances of getting further in the process. However, there should definitely be “meat” on the bones of the website—enough details to find your CV, your publications and other documents of interest in whatever discipline you’re working in.
But the standards are quite discipline-dependent. I’ve seen many math websites that are very simple text-driven pages, while others in the STEM disciplines might be more elaborate. What is needed in art may vary from history. So you should take your cue for the level of aesthetic needed from other recent successful applicants in your discipline.
Yes, mimic the standards of recently successful job market candidates with similar fields as you. Don’t spend extra time making it stand out, and consider just using the standard template for your university if available. You can signal your computational chops by linking to your Git depositories or similar rather than by coding a website. The site should be a useful spot to have your info in one place.
I've been on hiring committees for both full time/tenure track and adjuncts as well as administrative/professional positions (CISO, server admins, etc) at a community (no longer legally, we offer a few 4 year degrees) college.
I've never looked at social media of any type regarding a candidate, I don't recall any of my coworkers on the committees mentioning it, etc. Only time I've even looked at websites has been when hiring a front end web developer, and that was more "samples of relevant work portfolio" than "what info can we find out about these candidates".
What "we" have looked at when hiring instructors is transcripts, "real world" work experience (for relevant fields like the health sciences and programming/networking/server admin AS degree tracks), teaching experience, experience with lesson planning and evaluation methods, etc. Most departments ask potentials to give a demo lesson on some subject to evaluate teaching style, etc. We have the usual questions vetted by HR about your greatest successes and failures, what type of cloth you would be covered in if you were a couch, etc. and for teaching staff there is always the one included about your teaching philosophy and what you do to promote learning, etc.
If you have time, work on related-to-teaching-in-general skills, like using a learning management system (I recommend Canvas) and other content creation/management tools. Would give you a slight boost on any committee I (or probably any support staff) would be on and will let you hit the ground if not running then at least knowing you are in a race if you get hired at the last minute for Fall (the college I work at is madly hiring right now for both full time and adjunct, classes start Aug 22)
As others have stated more eloquently, a web presence will not make or break your application, but it can definitely help convey additional information, which could be an advantage, since people generally like what they (think they) know, and it helps anyone interested to know more about you. As most of today's search committees probably don't have a majority of millennials, a prominent presence on Twitter (and likely most other primarily social media) is unlikely to help you there, so I would stick to some form of web page. (On the other hand, if you are later thinking about attracting students/postdocs, popular social media can improve the visibility of your research.)
Consider also the longer view – a website can enhance your reputation among the wider community if you put useful content on it, which could come in handy when it come to promotion or the next search. You are in a computational field, so perhaps you have developed code that is worth sharing with others. You could put that on a web site dedicated to your research, or (for more complex code) on a specialized place like GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, etc. (and link there from your web site). Think about where you would look for information about your research, and consider if there are ways to contribute to those places.
My hope is that my research productivity will stand on its own and I will not have to engage in social media self-promotion.
The most important thing to keep in mind is that you are not promoting yourself, but your research! Show that you are excited about it, and share what you have found out – both through your published papers and via less formal means, which also allow you to showcase research in progress, preliminary results, and ideas you are pursuing. I would consider it in fact import to stick to your research, because too much focus on your good looks or personal rants will not help you to be taken seriously.
You may already be disseminating your working papers through sites such SSRN or arXiv.org (if not, consider it, if this is done at all in your field). A website gives you the opportunity to point to all those sources from one place.
How you create the web site (prefab or DIY) is secondary to the content - something very basic is preferable to nothing at all. Keep in mind that a site full of poor spelling and grammar that has not updated in 5+ years will do the opposite of what you want, so it is preferable to have something you can set up and maintain in minutes. For a few dollars you can get your own domain name, but if something smacks of vanity (JohnDoe.com), it may earn as much ridicule as admiration. Remember, if it is not important to the people you care about (how seriously would you take someone who judges people by the layout of their website or their domain name?), don't bother.
+1 for promoting your research. There is a ton of work out there, yours needs to be easy to find and appreciate
While the answer of aeismail is fine, let me add the following. If you are seeking a teaching position, and you have a web site that is especially useful to students of the subject, not just your own students, then it might be worth having. But if it is mostly just repetitious of what you have in your CV and supplied materials, then it will have little value at all.
Likewise if the positions are mostly research oriented then a web site that would be especially useful to budding researchers (future MS candidates, say) might also be useful to have.
And of course, once you are employed either or both of these are worth developing. I was once (no longer) the top google hit on my (not uncommon) family name, but this was in google's earlier days. I had an extensive and useful web site that was bookmarked by a lot of (mostly) teaching professors and students.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.490196 | 2018-07-09T13:57:54 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/112401",
"authors": [
"Andreas Blass",
"Dawn",
"FuzzyLeapfrog",
"Konrad Rudolph",
"Oleg Lobachev",
"TripeHound",
"aeismail",
"dotancohen",
"elisa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23951",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35918",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41148",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45839",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68222",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/980",
"paul garrett",
"user0721090601"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
12502 | Is a research thesis (report) with zero contribution to human knowledge acceptable?
An alternate title could be "Do we award a PhD for what the student became or for what he produced?". More precisely, if a research thesis report does not advance human knowledge, yet still shows that the student acquired the right skills of investigation, should the title of Philosophy Doctor be awarded?
I kind of always assumed that a thesis (PhD thesis in particular) should have some positive results (where positive means "advancing the state of human knowledge"), and that part of the art of finding a good topic of research was the art of asking the right kind of question, which would yield some positive result independently of the answer. Similar views are expressed in this other stackexchange question and the corresponding answers:
It is an expectation that the PhD would make an original contribution and/or advance knowledge in a given field. I understand this is a universal assumption for this level of study across all universities. (...) usually a PhD is measured on its contribution to expand knowledge.
Nevertheless, Justin Zobel defends convincingly the opposite view in "Writing for Computer Science", p.154 of the Second Edition:
even if good results are not achieved, the thesis should pass if you have shown the ability to undertake high-quality research. (...)
A thesis with negative results can, if appropriately written, demonstrate the ability of the candidate just as well a a thesis with positive results. (...)
it is you, not the research, that is the primary object of scrutiny
Is there an agreement across disciplines about this question?
I am not directly concerned (I reported positive results in my PhD thesis long ago, have many positive results to report in my "Habilitation" thesis, and I certainly aim for my students to report positive results in theirs), but I am curious about the real objective of the thesis:
- as an advisor, I could suggest a more risky topic if it had the potential to teach more to the student without risking the whole graduating thing; and
- as a referee or member of an evaluation committee, I have to judge students and/or their thesis...
Extreme Fictional Example
A student and advisor do the entire research work following the most rigorous scientific process for several years, only to find their efforts ruined near the end of the process either by a budget cut, the disappearance of the species they were studying, or the discovery that the problem is the consequence of an obscure results from year ago in another research community.
The student has followed and learned the scientific process, but did not contribute to human knowledge (apart from maybe improving the index of its bibliography). If the student has showed the qualities required from a good researcher, should(n't) he/she be awarded the title of "Doctor in Philosophy", independently of the contribution made to human knowledge?
This is truly a rhetorical question, and I doubt this kind of situation happens often. Yet the idea is new to me and I kind of like it, albeit I doubt the whole community would agree...
Opposite Extreme Example
Imagine that a student, stroke by luck, makes an amazing scientific discovery which deeply impact human knowledge, and can be understood by all even though the student poorly redacts it. It seems clear to me that the society would not benefit from awarding a PhD to such a student, who has not learned how to do research even though contributing to human knowledge.
On the other hand, setting two conditions for the awarding of a PhD, having learned how to do proper research AND having advanced human knowledge by using it, introduces trade-offs and compromises (which again do not serve society).
Do you mean only negative results? As in "this doesn't work"?
@Zimmerman: Yes. But it might also mean "I tried this and I failed."
My dissertation was a world class, high precision, extension of previous work into new territory null result. This kind of thing is not sexy, but they will still call you "doctor" after your defense.
Well, there's a difference in negative results if they can be proven or if they're result of empirical evidence (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence). I don't know which field you are referring to, but a negative result in mathematics is different from a negative result in, say, epidemiology.
Sorry for the misunderstanding about "positive/negative": it is supposed to relate to the improvement to human knowledge. I rephrased accordingly.
With the revised title, and in particular for the fictional example, the answer is clearly NO. Zobel is simply wrong. (Negative results also advance human knowledge. No results at all do not.)
@JeffE: I used "positive" and "negative" in the sense used by Zobel, i.e. "advancing human knowledge" or not. Then the question boils down to: "Do we award a PhD for what the student became or for what he produced?"
@JeffE Did your "the answer is clearly NO" mean that we award a PhD for what the student produced rather than what he showed he could achieve?
@Jeremy: I wouldn't give a "Top Chef" award to someone simply for "showing the qualities" of being a good cook -- some actual output (tasty food) would be expected! Similarly, I can't imagine awarding a PhD simply for "showing the qualities" of a good researcher -- some actual research output would be expected.
In my view, if a negative result (failure) in a risky project is still acceptable for publication/thesis, then that project is not risky.
For what he produced. (The only way to show what you can achieve is to actually achieve it.)
A PhD title (to some extent, and whether it should or not) acts as a gateway to the higher echelons of academia. Someone who has spent five years researching as part of a PhD but didn't get the title in the end might be a good candidate for a research assistant position, as he has research experience but I wouldn't expect him to start leading a research team and set a research agenda for the next decade until he's shown he can deliver. A PhD title is one such indicator, flawed as it may be for the types of extreme examples you cite above.
Disappearance of a studied species doen't influence the advance of knowledge they got from studying (mammoths or dinosaurs or even the very dead Ötzi are perfectly valid subjects for scientific studies). As for the budget cut, my PhD supervisor would have said that money in itself is not a scientific argument, and I agree to the extent that a budget cut doesn't invalidate the work that has been done so far. "the problem is the consequence of an obscure results from year ago in another research community" is a bit more tricky. Translation of results form another research community plus the...
... experimental demonstration that this translation did (or even did not!) work are valid advances. Finding that some has published exactly the same does hurt the thesis, though. Although I'd usually expect maybe strong similarities but the chance that it really was exactly the same is minute. I had a somewhat similar situation in my PhD thesis: a certain problem to be solved and I couldn't find anything in the literature. I asked around at conferences, but the answer was invariably that the solution would be important and please would I notify them once I have it. After developing a solution
... this solution suggested further search terms which did turn up literature in another field where the whole thing was discussed under a terminology that was totally different from my field's terminology. In addition, it turned out that the other field had settled to a default in some decisions that need to be taken in the solution that were not appropriate for my task, so I did contribute a) a critique of the existing research and b) a solution for defaults that are appropriate in my field. In terms of my solution-finding abilities, I know that I'm able on my own to find such solutions...
... since I did so. But in terms of the thesis or novelty for a publication there's no way for me to prove that I did it on my own rather than knowing the existing literature. So that part could not be considered as demonstration of my ability. Which is maybe tough luck, but also IMHO not something that should be entirely unexpected.
The question as currently asked is: Is a research thesis (report) with zero contribution to human knowledge acceptable?
And the answer to that question is no.
A thesis or portfolio submitted for a PhD or higher doctorate must make a novel contribution to human knowledge. It must also demonstrate that the applicant has acquired the appropriate level of research skills.
Some negative results do advance human knowledge. So a thesis with negative results and no positive results may make a novel contribution to human knowledge. e.g. demonstration of absence of an effect is a negative result, but can be a distinct and significant contribution to new knowledge (particularly if the effect was previously believed to exist).
However, just spending the time, putting in the effort, and churning out the right quantity of work, is not in and of itself sufficient.
Basis for this
This is based on a combination of my employer's guidelines, my experiences as a PhD supervisor, and advice from my colleagues. I hear that there are other (less well-respected) institutions that award doctorates just for putting in the effort and churning out the right quantity of work, regardless of novelty of contribution, or of demonstration of research skill
A quote from some official guidelines.
Here's a quote from the relevant part of the academic regulations for PhD examinations from UCL, University College London (pdf):
A thesis for the awards of EngD or PhD degree shall be examined in accordance with
the criteria prescribed by UCL and the thesis shall demonstrate that it: ...
shows a student's capacity to pursue original research in the field of study
based on a good understanding of the research techniques and concepts
appropriate to the discipline; ...
represents a distinct and significant contribution to the subject, whether through
the discovery of new knowledge, the connection of previously unrelated facts,
the development of new theory, or the revision of older views;
Do you have references to any official policy expressing that, or is it just your opinion?
@Jeremy Thanks for the request for clarification. I've edited the answer accordingly.
I'd actually say that many negative results advance knowledge as long as the approach was sensible to attempt (that's where the judgment of the candiadate's ability comes in).
I assume that by negative results, you mean non-significant results.
"It is an expectation that the PhD would make an original contribution and/or advance knowledge in a given field." Yes, this is true. And "X doesn't work" is a contribution to the field.
(To use an example from my area). Health practitioners are constantly dreaming up things that might work to treat various ailments (illnessess), and using them. The job of health researchers is to find out which ones work - and most of them don't work.
We used to joke that our role as health care researchers was to say no. "Nope. That doesn't work. Don't do it. No, that one's not effective either. No, don't use that. No. No. No."
Pressure for positive results just means you tweak models and data until you find them - using 'researcher degrees of freedom' (see http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/11/1359). Your results are therefore significant, but worthless.
My PhD thesis was trying to demonstrate the nature of the relationship between stress and psoriasis symptoms (many people say "stress worsens psoriasis" - it's taken as a given truth, but it's never been empirically demonstrated). I was trying to answer things like what kind of stress, how long does it take, does it differ between people? I never found any evidence that stress did worsen psoriasis. Nor that psoriasis worsened stress (or any other psychological symptom).
A PhD is an educational process. One should demonstrate that one has learned. The most important thing about a PhD is showing what you know, what you have learned, and what you understand. If anyone gets to the end of a PhD and says "Well, those results were all positive, just as I expected", they've learned little. At the end of your PhD (or any research project) you should want to start again, and this time do it properly.
Actually, a really non-significant result would be to do the entire research work (e.g. about psoriasis and stress) following the most rigorous scientific process, only to find at the end of the process that the result is a consequence of an obscure Russian (let's say) from the 50s. The student has followed and learned the scientific process, but did not contribute to human knowledge (apart from improving the index of its bibliography). Does he/she deserves a PhD for his learning? This idea is new to me but I kind of like it, albeit I doubt the whole community would agree.
@Jeremy Perhaps the point is that a PhD is supposed to have the wisdom to first ascertain whether he is researching a mere consequence of a Russian from the 50s before putting in an enormous amount of work.
@Superbest By obscure, I meant non-translated in English. A lot of results were obtained in parallel during the cold war, and some were obtained separaterly but "rediscovered" only later.
@Jeremy in that particular example the scientific advancement would certainly be weakend, but it probably wouldn't be zero (it's unlikely that the same set of stressors was tested, medical problems may differ between different populations, so even not finding any difference to back then would be some advancement). Also, as more replication is crucially needed in the life sciences, even "only" replicating the Russion results would IMHO be an advancement. Though (again IMHO) it would not be sufficient on its own for the thesis: the problem is that the candidate then cannot demonstrate they...
... designed the study on their own rather than just using the Russian design. And theses usually require novelty as that makes finding out what the candidate's work is (for which they are graded) is unambiguous/much easier.
This is a tough question. Just to abstain from the discussion of different standards in different fields, I'll talk of mathematics only. Also, I'll assume that it is a question about a PhD thesis, not about anything of lower level like Masters, etc.
The main thing is that the gap between "advancing human knowledge" and "mastering the subject" is huge and there is a lot of grades in-between. IMHO, the works that advance human knowledge are rare, be it PhD theses or papers in refereed journals. Most of us live off "doing what hasn't been done before", which is much less demanding. What I mean is that each work introducing a new idea is followed by 1000 ones applying this idea combined with already known stuff to all setups where it works. Each of those 1000 papers does what hasn't been done before but does not advance human knowledge because, once the new idea appears, every sufficiently high level professional can figure out how it may be applied elsewhere, though getting all details right may require patience and even some effort. I certainly would accept "doing what hasn't been done before" (a successful application of a well-known idea in a fairly straightforward way to a new setup) as a tolerable (but not brilliant) PhD thesis.
How much below that would I consider acceptable? Four out of every five projects I try end up in a miserable failure, when I cannot even claim that I have proved some partial result in the desired direction. I have never tried to write a detailed account of "mein kampf" for any of those (dead end moves with counterexamples at the end, chains of implications that never meet the goal, associations and studies of seemingly relevant things that failed to relate to the question at hand for some fundamental but hard to discern reason, etc.) but I would let a report like that pass as a PhD thesis if it really shows 3 years worth of high quality effort.
What I find not acceptable is a "literature survey" (understanding what is written elsewhere and relating things in a superficial way without deriving any new result or introducing any new twist into the story). In other words, my idea is that you should get your PhD after you show that you can "fight a mathematical battle on your own", not only study the battles fought by other people. The victory in a decent battle is sufficient, but not necessary. Sometimes you can be made a "general" even if you lose but show good fighting skills.
All this is my humble opinion only. As to the official point of view, in Russia we had the central committee that had to confirm every degree award before it became valid and there were written guidelines. In the USA it is way more relaxed, so 4-5 professors conspiring together can pass anyone (to the credit of them I should say that I cannot give an example of such conspiracy). Canada requires an external review to be positive (which, by the way, makes perfect sense as a simple safeguard against "local standard relaxation" to me), and so on.
As to "risky topics", the best ambitious projects are such where "something" can be done right away (not something that is worth talking about as "defendable" or "publishable", but something that shows that the student has the general grasp of the subject and decent problem-solving skills). If that something (or something equivalent) is not done within the first half a year, it is a sign of trouble and the ambitious project is better abandoned and replaced with an "apply a known idea in a straightforward way to a new setup" one. If it is, you have a chance and may consider taking the risk. Unfortunately, there is nothing that can guide you then except your gut feelings and your knowledge of the student. You and your student are in an uncharted territory all on your own, and no general advice can be given except "play by ear" and "act by circumstances".
"Each of those 1000 papers does what hasn't been done before but does not advance human knowledge because, once the new idea appears, every sufficiently high level professional can figure out how it may be applied elsewhere" But figuring out how to apply it and actually applying it are two completely different things, and only both together are probably what should get you the PhD (though some supervisors hand their students a topic on a platter). Also, I'd argue that finding out that X does (not) work in context Y does advance human knowledge.
@TomasH "figuring out how to apply it and actually applying it are two completely different things" That depends on the meaning of the words "to figure out". For me they mean that one can do the whole thing and write it down in reasonable time if forced, just doesn't consider it worth time and effort. In this case, there is little difference. "finding out that X does (not) work in context Y does advance human knowledge" Yes for "does", if nobody else can see it. No, if (as it often happens) it is fairly clear to many. Again, the question is what the words "to find out" really mean.
Well, this negative result got a fair amount of press, this negative result is generally considered a big deal, and my guess is that a negative result about this problem would probably be considered an acceptable thesis. :-) So the trivial answer to the original question is: "Yes." On the other hand, it's easy to think of negative results that wouldn't pass muster for a thesis. So perhaps the underlying question is: "How can we tell whether a negative result qualifies for a thesis?"
A thesis is expected to make an intellectual contribution. If I prove a bunch of trivial negative results that surprise no one, then I don't make any intellectual contribution. On the other hand, if a lot of good researchers believe X, and I show that X doesn't hold, then that changes the state of knowledge in the field and therefore is a contribution. (In many cases, the real contribution from such negative results is the analysis explaining why X doesn't hold --- i.e., why the scientific intuitions of a bunch of good researchers are incorrect.)
So the questions I would ask would be: are the negative results unexpected? Do they give us new insights into, or a better understanding of, the phenomena being studied? If these questions can be answered positively then I think the negative results qualify for a thesis; if not, then IMHO they do not. The bottom line is, simply: "Do the results (positive or negative) teach us anything?"
You assert "A thesis is expected to make an intellectual contribution", which clashes with Zobel's statement "even if good results are not achieved, the thesis should pass if you have shown the ability to undertake high-quality research". Sorry if my use of the term "negative" sent you off-track: I will rephrase.
@Jeremy It's Zobel's use of the word "negative" that's the problem, especially since he talks about "negative result". As JeffE remarked above, negative result and no result are two different things. If you prove X doesn't hold (negative result), you've advanced human knowledge and made an intellectual contribution. But if you haven't proven whether X holds or not (no result) then you haven't made a contribution. Yes, you might be unlucky and research down a dead end where it turns out you can't prove X either way, but if you show why you can't prove X, that is still a contribution
In fast moving fields one can get scooped fairly easily. For example a biology PhD thesis may be based around determining the structure of a protein. If someone else publishes the structure before the thesis is reviewed then there is not a contribution to human knowledge since the structure is already known. I think in these fast moving fields the student would be expected to do more. In my "slow" moving field I am aware of two theses (one PhD and one MSc) where the results where the key findings were published by someone else in the weeks before the thesis was finished.
An historical example: Alan Turing was named a fellow at Cambridge on the basis of work that Lindeberg published over a decade prior. Admittedly, this was not a PhD thesis, but I am under the impression the import is comparable. Keynes, for example, had no PhD but was named a fellow prior to becoming a professor.
There is no evidence to suggest that Turing was aware of Lindeberg's work, but I am under the impression that they're approaches were quite similar.
I have heard similar stories on a less grand scale. No doubt the results of many theses have been previously published. Should it matter whether this connection is discovered before or after the thesis is submitted, assuming the new results did not draw on the old?
For a research project to be successful, you need more than just
a good student
You also need
a good concept and
a good advisor
Of course these points are not independent: up to a certain point a good student will be able to make sure the concept is good. At least the good advisor will do that. But what if the advisor isn't that good, and in consequence the project concept is flawed and the student gets bad advise and that is the reason for only negative results?
IMHO, having only negative results likely hamper the project success in an indirect way:
do not underestimate the psychological effect on the student: not succeeding in something that the advisor told you to do can have serious effects on the student's self-esteem and that can in turn lead to giving up or anyways loose the "psychological bonus" that you can only get if you are convinced of your work.
Depending on what kind of negative results, and how the project was specified, "it doesn't work" could be either due to the student's inability/laziness or due to the fact that things just don't work that way. Therefore "it doesn't work" always has a danger of falling back onto the student, even if it was not the student's fault.
It is hard for the student to prove that it wasn't his fault in that case, which may mean wasting lots of effort just to make sure that noone can come and blame the student for the bad results.
All together, I'd be extremely cautious with
I could suggest a more risky topic if it had the potential to teach more to the student without risking the whole graduating thing
Whether I'd at all consider this would also depend on other circumstances. Maybe it is because I've seen bad advisors putting students into risky projects and leaving them in the resulting difficulties.
So at the very least I think that entering a project that the advisor already before it ever began perceives as more risky, should be entered
by a clear understanding between advisor and student that this is risky (but much may come out of it)
only if the advisor knows the student well enough to be able to judge whether the student could stand this
only with a clear risk-management strategy: the risk the student takes must be made up by something else.
How about treating such risky projects as normal job and paying a full wage if you cannot guarantee that even a good student will be able to get a thesis out of the results?
Here's an example (heard of it by rumour only) of how such things go wrong:
project involves growing some plants over 2 years. If all goes well, student can finish thesis in 3 years.
Student is hired for the project on a fixed 3 year contract, and is told that the project really shouldn't take longer. (Apparently, there is no money for more than 3 years). In the 2nd year a minor flooding kills the experiment.
Floods are in no way an unheard of occurrence in the region.
IMHO in this project the student was left not only with a project that had the inherent risk that the work of 2 years may be lost just before it was "ripe". The really bad thing is that it was combined with no plan B (e.g. extending the project), and occured in a country where a failed thesis is a serious thing: it wouldn't work to say in the beginning: "let's try this, and if it fails after 3 years, why, then you can just go on and try another project".
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.491252 | 2013-09-06T17:46:29 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12502",
"authors": [
"410 gone",
"Adam",
"Air",
"BetaTeletype",
"Bitwise",
"Cassini",
"Dylan McKay",
"Felipe Jacob",
"J. Zimmerman",
"J.y B.y",
"JeffE",
"No Land",
"Oleh Kuchuk",
"QCD_IS_GOOD",
"Richard",
"Superbest",
"ThomasH",
"Trixie Wolf",
"Vectorito",
"ZAR",
"boscovich",
"cagryInside",
"cbeleites",
"debray",
"dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten",
"edeesan",
"fedja",
"g3d",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1318",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/179404",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/244",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31601",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31602",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31603",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31604",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31610",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31639",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31658",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31659",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31689",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31691",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31694",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31728",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31729",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31732",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31811",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31813",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/32386",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4125",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42155",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/440",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46863",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6118",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/663",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6862",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7921",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7974",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96",
"jacksonjsouza",
"neelambuj_",
"raphaglcom",
"user4667380"
],
"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
} |
3540 | Do you list journals you have reviewed for on your CV?
Is it acceptable to list the journals you have reviewed papers for on your CV? Is it common? Do you think it’s recommended?
On the one hand, it shows that you are engaged in this necessary part of scientific research that is peer-review. On the other hand, it sounds a bit useless, because everyone actually reviews papers for journals, and it is actually an unverifiable information (reviewers are confidential).
Some journals publish reviewer lists, so it is sometimes verifiable.
CV's have different audiences - I have at least 5 versions (different organizations request different aspects). The journals reviewed winds up on the version of my CV I used for promotion and tenure evaluations, as it's a "service to the community" aspect. It won't be on my CV for my research web page.
Also: What about for non-academic resumes?
On the one hand, it shows that you are engaged in this necessary part
of scientific research that is peer-review.
That's one of the major reasons why people list it. If your CV is being viewed as part of a performance review or hiring decision, or even for awards, this constitutes "service to the community" and indicates that you're a good citizen.
It's a noisy signal for the reasons you indicate, and so it doesn't carry a whole lot of weight compared to things like technical committee memberships and leadership roles, but it's part of the larger picture. Moreover, for more junior researchers who haven't yet had the chance to take on leadership roles, this is a good signal of service.
Let us not forget, that reviewing for a certain scientific field makes you officially the Boss. Confidence and reputation boost guaranteed.
I did this in the earlier stages of my career, when every little bit of CV weight helped. But as the number grew, and as I did other more significant things, I removed all traces of reviewing.
You need to show that you are involved in the community when you are young and starting out. Later other aspects will be more important.
I would say that being asked by a journal to review an article is an indicator of esteem and for that reason, suitable and useful for inclusion in your CV.
With regard to confirming - or otherwise - whether or not you did indeed act as a referee for a journal, I would expect that anyone who wanted to verify this could ask the journal in question. Which specific articles that you reviewed could, properly, remain confidential. However, disclosing the information that you acted as a referee for the journal would not, as far as I can see, break any confidentiality policy.
Probably, a journal can say without breaking confidentiality rules that X acted as reviewer for them… but I don't know if they actually would answer such requests.
@F'x: there could be potentially a problem with journal revealing its reviewers in a too liberal fashion. Most of the time, the idea is to have a blind review. Yet, many journals ask authors to list potential reviewers of their submission. Simply asking whether somebody reviewed for the journal could sometimes jeopardize the blind review process.
Many journals in fact publish a yearly list of people who did reviews for them in this or the previous year. Typically entitled "Acknowledgment of reviewers" or similar.
I will essentially repeat the answer I gave here. The context for what the CV is going to be used for is key. I have a single CV that includes "everything" since I started grad school and selected things from before then. Having a long CV makes it easier for me to create short CVs because it means I need to delete things instead of remember things.
When I would include this information depends on the purpose of the CV and your previous experience. If you are giving a talk and someone asks you for a CV, then I would leave it off. If you are applying for a job and it is your only evidence of service, I would leave it in.
It is accepted, common and, yes, recommended. Being asked to review means your knowledge in a field is acknowledged and sought by others. The details you provide is up to you. I list the journals I have reviewed for in impact factor order, but it can be any order. I do not provide the number of reviews for each but the total for all. There is no reason to provide more than number of reviews and names of journals.
You have a point in that this information is unverifiable in many circumstances. In my field it is, however, common to be known as a reviewer (you have a choice). How the information is used is up to those who read the CV but I think most people will assume you have not falsified your CV (and that assumption goes for the remainder of your CV as well).
In the end, the art of writing your CV is to add anything that can reflect positively on your (in this case) scientific merits and reviewing is such a task. I also include reviews I have done for large funding organisations (e.g. NERC, UK, and NSF, US) as well as evaluations for promotions etc.
I know I am late to this, but I want to add that "actually an unverifiable information" is no longer necessarily true. You can verify peer-review work via publons and apparently ORCID (https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/126707/134392).
https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/94309/is-it-worth-creating-a-profile-with-publons Is this answer advertising?
I am not sure what you mean by "answer advertising"
I just wanted to point out that the question and many of the answers saying that peer-review is unverifiable is no longer true.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.493419 | 2012-10-02T20:16:59 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3540",
"authors": [
"1234567",
"Andy W",
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Colin",
"Dylan_Gomes",
"F'x",
"Fuhrmanator",
"G M",
"George Newton",
"Ian Young",
"Swapnil",
"casey",
"fgysin",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10333",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10334",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10335",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10336",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10337",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10338",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10378",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1265",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/134392",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28728",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28766",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3859",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3890",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5757",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8401",
"shaw2thefloor",
"silvado",
"user2488233",
"walkmanyi",
"youns"
],
"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
} |
9301 | What is the difference between Abstract, conclusion and summary?
The above question is self explanatory, still I would like to break it into two parts.
Q1. What is the difference between abstract and summary/conclusion?
Q2. What is the difference between summary and conclusion ?
Thanks
See classic texts K. K. Landes. A scrutiny of the abstract. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 50(9):1992, 1969. and J. F. Claerbout. A scrutiny of the introduction. Stanford Exploration Project, 59:287 – 291, 1988.
some links: http://www.ece.utep.edu/courses/ee3329/ee3329/abstract.html and http://www.aapg.org/bulletin/abstract_scrutiny.pdf
See How to write a paper. Here's a choice excerpt: There are papers that may benefit from a conclusion section, but they are
relatively few (say, less than 5% of the papers). Certainly, the inclusion of a conclusion section
should not be the default.
This page on Stackexchange may also help.
Tell them what you're going to tell them. Tell them. Tell them what you told them.
The abstract is written for the potentially interested reader. While writing it, keep in mind that most readers read the abstract before they read the paper (sounds obvious, but many abstracts read like the authors did not consider this). The abstract should give an impression of what the paper will be about. Do not use jargon or any abbreviations here. It should be understandable for non-specialists and even for people from fields somehow far away.
The conclusion should conclude the paper and is written for the reader who already has read the paper. In other words: most readers have read the paper when they read the conclusion. Again, this sounds obvious but, again, a lot of conclusions do not read like this. It does not make sense to write a conclusion like "we have shown this and that by using this and that method". Well, this is what the reader has just read (and what he may know since he has read the abstract). A proper conclusion should tell the reader what she can or he could do with the newly acquired knowledge. Answer the question "So what?".
A summary sums up the paper. I am not sure if a paper needs a summary.
I've written some tips for abstracts some time ago:
Avoid jargon. Although this sounds obvious, most abstracts contain jargon in one way or the other. Of course one can not avoid the use of specific terminology and technical terms but even then there is an easy check if a technical term is appropriate: Try to find a definition on the internet (if the term has a fairly stable wikipedia page, there it is not jargon) – if you do not succeed within a few minutes you should find a different word.
Use buzzwords. This may sound to contradict the previous point and in part it does. But note that you can use a buzzword together with its explanation. Again, the example from the previous point works: “Funk metric” may be a buzzword and the explanation using the name “Finsler” is supposed to ring a bell (as I learned, it is related to Hilbert’s 23rd problem). This helps the readers to find related work and to remember what was the field you were working in.
General to specific. In general, it’s good advice to work from general to specific. Start with a sentence which points in the direction of the field you are working in. So your potential audience will know from the beginning in which field your work is situated.
Answer questions. If you think that your work answers questions, why not pose the questions in the abstract? This may motivate the readers to think by themselves and draw their interest to the topic.
Don’t be afraid of layman’s terms. Although layman’s terms usually do not give exact description and sometimes even are ridiculously oversimplified, they still help to form a mental picture.
Just to add a little on this, abstracts should be short (1/2 page in my field) and should try to explain all of the key points of the paper, including the methodology, key findings, implications, etc. The goal of the abstract is to let the reader decide if there is any value in reading the entire paper.
For abstracts, I always follow the advice in Simon Peyton Jones's presentation "How to write a great research paper" (He credits Kent Beck, but I can't find the exact reference): 1. State the problem 2. Say why it's an interesting problem 3. Say what your solution achieves 4. Say what follows from your solution. It's amazing how much clearer and to the point your abstracts become.
I downvoted because, for technical fields, using jargon in the abstract is almost always a good thing. Show me a mathematics abstract with no "jargon". But you should avoid using terms that your intended audience will not already know.
@DavidKetcheson I stand by my recommendation. If you use a technical tern for you can find a good definition quickly on the internet (wikipedia, google books or sometimes the arxiv) then use something else.
@Dirk your last comment contains some grammar and spelling errors that prevent me from understanding it.
@DavidKetcheson Ooops - typing on a telephone in not my strength… Here goes: I stand by my recommendation. If you use a technical term for which you can't find a good definition quickly on the internet (wikipedia, google books or sometimes the arxiv) then use something else. Because in this situation it may well be that the community has not agreed on the notion yet.
'It does not make sense to write a conclusion like "we have shown this and that by using this and that method"' - I somewhat disagree here. The reader has read the details of the paper before reading the conclusion (or maybe not even that, if they follow the abstract - conclusion - rest of text method of approaching an unknown paper), but especially due to this large amount of information, it is important that the conclusion briefly summarizes the key content in a few sentences. Cf. with presentation slides, where the last slide summarizes the key points.
Yes, this. The difference between the abstract and the conclusion is in the intended audience. A caveat is that many readers will skip to the conclusion to get an idea of what they will know after reading the paper. But you still write the conclusion as if to an audience that has already read it.
Also, there is somewhat called abrégé, which is placed right after the heading of each chapter. Abrégé is very (not longer then 1/2 of a page, i.e. it is shorter then typical abstract) and describes the chapter instead of document. (Feel free to correct me).
I would add: make sure the abstract isn't a "teaser". It should actually summarize the findings, not leave them as a cliffhanger to draw in the reader. Many people who encounter the paper will only ever read the abstract, and only ever want to.
A1: In the context of a journal article, thesis etc., the abstract should provide a brief summary of each of the main parts of the article: Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion. In the words of Houghton (1975), "An abstract can be defined as a summary of the information in a document". The Conclusions (in some cases also called a Summary) chapter is a summary of the main ideas that come out from the discussion (e.g., Katz, 2009) and hence only a subset of the abstract. Usually, the Conclusions sum up the discussion whereas the abstract only reiterates the most important of the conclusions.
A2: The difference between a summary and the conclusions is less clear. First, it is not clear if the summary is to be compared with the Abstract or the Conclusions. A summary may also be more appropriate as Conclusions when writing an overview where the conclusions may not be easy to identify. As stated above some journals use the word Summary instead of Conclusions. Sometimes this can also be labelled Synthesis and cap off a lengthy discussion.
References:
Houghton, B., 1975. Scientific periodicals: their historical development, characteristics and control. Hamden CT, Shoe String Press.
Katz, M.J., 2009. From research to manuscript. A guide to scientific writing. Second edition. Berlin, Springer.
I don't think it's accurate to say that the conclusion is a subset of the abstract. Some elements from the abstract make it into the conclusion, but the conclusion will likely include information not in the abstract as well, such as a detailed discussion of "why it all matters".
@Peter Jansson Regarding the conclusions you mentioned ".... and hence only a subset of the abstract". Then you mentioned: ".... the abstract only reiterates the most important of the conclusions." How it comes?
Abstract:
Author short story about what is in it (no matter good or bad, valuable or scrap)
Conclusion:
Authors statement about the findings justified by the detailed content (findings/achievement/affirmation of a doubtful fact/negation of an established belief...etc) for a reader who has a guided-travel across by the author.
A conclusion section might for example include speculations about some patterns in the data, or proposals for future research. It basically is really the only place to put your opinions. A summary I expect would not include any opinions and just re-iterate the findings and weaknesses in the study.
As the other answer mentioned, the abstract should include all the main aspects of the paper in an abbreviated form - the topic, the hypotheses, the participants and study design, and the results.
abstract = what is to be done by researcher in the given paper.
summary = what is accomplished in the paper under consideration.
conclusion = what are the limitations of study, what needs to be done by upcoming researchers.
I am not sure about the equal sign you use. I have seen papers using conclusion for summary and vice versa.
Summary: Its a brief note that gives us an overview, ideas and insight about major topics in a paper.
Abstract: Its a short note that express the contents of the work.
Conclusion: Its a statement/decision reached by the researcher based on findings in the research.
One basic difference: An abstract is always at the beginning of a academic paper. A conclusion is always at the end. A summary could be anywhere, even separate from the paper itself, so it's a bit more slippery.
The abstract is like a movie trailer.
The summary is an arrangement of actions/events of movie in a short way.
The conclusion is the objective of the movie in light of the evidence and arguments given in the movie.
The conclusion of one person can vary from that of another.
Now, the question becomes what is the difference between movie trailor and summary?
You could go so much further with this analogy. E.g., summary and conclusion together are like a review of a movie, with the summary being, well, the summary and the conclusion the interpretation and rating.
The abstract might very well be completely separate.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.493994 | 2013-04-11T19:00:21 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9301",
"authors": [
"Ahmar Ali",
"AlFagera",
"Alann Rosas",
"Austin Henley",
"Caleb Stanford",
"David Ketcheson",
"Dirk",
"Erick Johnson",
"Eugene Triguba",
"Irwin",
"JRN",
"JSmyth",
"Neeraj",
"Neeraj Hanumante",
"Nobody",
"O. R. Mapper",
"Olivier Grégoire",
"Ray Baxter",
"Spammer",
"Tammy Smith",
"Thomas Baskind",
"ThomasH",
"Wrzlprmft",
"antonio pepe",
"cw'",
"earthling",
"enthu",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14017",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15723",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/165123",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/165128",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/165130",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/169424",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/169431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/185",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/207478",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21413",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22773",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22774",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22775",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22778",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22780",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22789",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22801",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22802",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23946",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2692",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37635",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/38135",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4125",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/529",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/546",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5944",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62541",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62547",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64590",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/746",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/81",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/83508",
"john c. j.",
"jonescb",
"kiphok",
"lirason",
"mankoff",
"user3523464",
"vonbrand",
"workerjoe",
"zer0"
],
"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
} |
12627 | Nomenclatures and symbols expansion in text
In my thesis there are 7 chapters. Each chapter contains many nomenclatures and symbols.
Nomenclature:
Chapter 1
Monte Carlo (MC) simulation is wonderful. MC is a stochastic process.
Chapter 2/3/../7
Do I need to re-expand the nomenclatures at the beginning of each chapter or expanding at the chapter 1 (or first occurrence) is enough?
Symbol:
Same question applies for Symbols also. For example, Temperature (T)
(Note: Apart from the above, the list of abbreviations and symbols is a must in the thesis as per institute guideline.)
Related question, for expansion of acronyms in papers
Oh come on. Is it really that hard to write out "Monte Carlo"?
In addition towhat has already been said, you should consider whether all abbreviations are necessary. Some are part of jargon but sometimes you see something abbreviated only to be used, say, twice. In such a case it is unnecessary. My advice is to be relatively restrictive with new abbreviations and ones that are not used very frequently.
I personally think there is a tendency to over-use abbreviations and making wise decisions of when to use them and when not to use them should be part of all scientific writing. In the days when papers were printed on paper there may have been an incentive to make the text shorter but with digital publications, this is no longer really the case.
Whether you should re-introduce some abbreviations in each chapter, I think it is a matter of style and taste. The purpose of reiterating the explanation would be if you think the use is rare so that the reader would forget about them between occurrences. Then it may be useful to drop them altogether.
Variables are slightly different. You should only need to provide an explanation once. That in addition with a list of variables should be sufficient.
As a comment, in your example you abbreviate Monte Carlo simulation as MC and in the second sentence you essentially say "Monte Carlo is a stochastic process" (it is a place). You should use MCS to make the abbreviation full and not subject to misinterpretation.
+1 but when weighing up whether to use an abbreviation, also consider the length - it's often not worth abbreviating 3 short words, except in figures.
Unlike papers, theses are longer and typically not read in full (someone is going to say “typically not read at all”, but if you are writing yours, please don't listen to these people!). So expanding acronyms for the first time in each chapter makes sense. On the other hand, people who will read chapter 4 of your thesis are probably experts, and so they already know the common acronyms in your field.
For example, Monte Carlo (MC) is trivially used by anyone who knows molecular simulations and wouldn't need to be expanded more than once. On the other hand, acronyms of less common methods might warrant expansion once per chapter: Transition Matrix Monte Carlo (TMMC), Self-Learning Adaptive Umbrella Sampling (SLAUS), etc.
Another solution is to include a list of abbreviations and symbols at the end of your thesis!
The list of abbreviations and symbols is a must in the thesis as per institute guideline.
@cosmicraga if you have a list of abbreviations and symbols, don't sweat it too much then!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.495308 | 2013-09-13T09:19:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12627",
"authors": [
"Alex",
"Chris H",
"F'x",
"Hamish McGregor",
"Hanna",
"JeffE",
"Vincent Yu",
"cosmicraga",
"haresfur",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31960",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31961",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31964",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31970",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31971",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6763",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8494"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
5920 | Are overlapping dissertations ethically acceptable?
Would it be ethical for students working on the same team to include in their Ph.D. theses results arising from joint publications, ending up in different dissertations containing almost identical chapters?
Of course, the students should at least mention that the common chapters are excerpted from a joint publication. However, wouldn't a significant overlap at least indicate that the students have been unable to come up with enough strong and coherent results to make their own independent dissertations?
Hi user4423, and welcome. We're looking for a single question with an objective answer. Which of your two distinct questions would you like us to answer? The one starting "Would it be ethical ... " (likely to be closed as not constructive) or the one starting "wouldn't a significant overlap indicate ..." (to which "It depends. Not necessarily" is the meaningful and correct answer)?
Hi, thanks for the feedback. Sorry for the confusion: There is actually just one question, which is the one given in the title. The two subquestions are intended to give more details about the general issue of whether it is considered appropriate to publish the very same results in two different theses. I found the answers received so far to be quite useful.
I think for a PhD thesis it is important the writer has enough original and new contributions to earn the PhD degree. When two PhD's work closely together, and write joint publications this can only work if it is clear that both PhD's have made new and significant contributions.
For example, in a publication which has both lab experiments and numerical modeling it is easy to see that both the lab-PhD and the numerical-PhD have done different things, which are put together jointly into a publication. In this case I would think it ethical that both PhD's get their degree based on the same publications. If, however, the overlap is not countered by the fact that the PhD's each have their distinct niche, I would not find it ethical to let two people get their degree based on the same work.
In the PhD theses the publications could be used as such by both PhD, but they need to have a different introduction and synthesis chapter as they worked on different aspects of the joint papers. In addition, I would explain the situation and how the collaboration worked in the preface of both theses.
Sounds very reasonable.
You should check your department guideline. In mine, only articles where the candidate is first author, and has accomplished most of the work (you need to provide letter signed by other authors) can be used. Also, it can only be used in one thesis.
Thanks for the note, this makes total sense. Unfortunately, the issue is not mentioned in my department guidelines.
Then I would discuss this with your supervisor, maybe even someone higher up in the department to get clear how your university deals with this, just to prevent any trouble.
One case of this that's getting a bit old but was highly influential in artificial intelligence was Phil Agre and David Chapman (PhDs at the MIT AI Lab in the late 1980s). They did everything together, but wrote completely different dissertations. They agreed in advance how they would divvy up the output.
Since a PhD has to have a novel contribution, I think this is the only way it can work. You specify your contributions in the introduction and conclusion, and these can only be contributions by one person, for one dissertation.
Personally, I had a little bit of overlapping text in two of my dissertations (which for bizarre reasons came out nearly the same time), but it was only the literature review, which at the time I didn't think of as a contribution, and I clearly stated the overlap in the later dissertation. Also, I didn't claim that the thing I was best known for at that time (an action selection mechanism) was a contribution to either dissertation, just to be certain there could be no claim I'd made overlapping contributions (One was in Psychology & one was in Systems AI, so they really were pretty different.)
Basically, by the time you are ready for a PhD, you should be able to make any number of contributions. So being productive and publishing articles is the main thing to worry about, and then secondarily following through, and following the rules, so you get your degree. Your dissertation is not a documentation of your life's work – it's just one coherent document making a very clear academic contribution. Hopefully two good students working together would make more than enough contributions that they can divide them up and each write interesting dissertations.
In math at Berkeley this varied by advisor. Some advisors insisted that theses consist only of solo work, while others did not. My thesis consisted almost entirely of collaborative work (though with different collaborators), and I think one chapter may have also appeared in a collaborator's thesis. The advisor shouldn't sign off on the thesis if the student hasn't done enough work to deserve a PhD, but if you're going to do most of your work collaboratively after grad school it makes sense to me to do so during grad school.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.495608 | 2012-12-23T16:48:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5920",
"authors": [
"410 gone",
"Avi Steiner",
"Diego",
"K K",
"Katie",
"Michael Grant",
"Olorun",
"Paul Hiemstra",
"godfatherofpolka",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15336",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15339",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15340",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15403",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15610",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4091",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4423",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/44707",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/96",
"user4423"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
5206 | Is it ethical to use another university's journal subscription if yours doesn't have access?
As a graduate student, sometimes I really could use access to journals or databases of tables that for some reason my university doesn't subscribe to. I have friends at other Universities that do subscribe to these journals and it would be very helpful to have the data. Is it acceptable to ask them to retrieve the data? I don't really want to start this if it's going to run me afoul of the rules.
My acces to safari books online is sometimes not available because all the paid sessions are used by others. Not quite the same thing, but shows how it could be possibly unethical. Ethics are supposed to be enforced by the individual first, to avoid getting into trouble with laws.
@tomshafer does your university have an interlibrary loan system? They generally get you data/papers that your university doesn't subscribe to, by taking assistance from other universities.. In case you are concerned about whether or not you are pursuing the right channels...
Not an answer to your question but a potential solution to your problem-- in addition to inter-library-loan, you can almost always email the corresponding author for a reprint. In my experience authors are very happy that you are interested in their paper and will respond very quickly (like w/in hours) to a request.
Please note that many authors are willing to send you a copy of their paper if you can reach them (and that is perfectly legal, as this option exist in all the copyright transfer agreements for journals).
Is it against the law? Probably.
It it scientific misconduct? A breach of ethics? Hardly.
It is acceptable? It's your decision to make based on risk analysis. If you don't do it on a large scale (i.e. someone supplying many people with papers), it's probably okay. It is common practice.
Also, be aware that many journal articles can now be found either in pre-print or post-print form online (though this depends widely on your field), either on institutional repositories or on the authors' webpages. If you're merely missing access every once in a while, you can also nicely ask the corresponding author.
Against which law? Specifically, which jurisdiction? Since I'm pretty sure that click-through licensing holds no legal value in Sweden, I'm not so sure that paper-sharing is any more egregious than, say, going to the other University's library directly and reading the paper there...
@Mikael that's the point of “probably” in my answer. There are plenty of places where this would definitely unlawful, but I can't speak for every jurisdiction. Regarding the analogy with physical libraries, transmitting a PDF file is not like reading directly, it is an act of copying.
Our university and the journal host all say that access is provided to current students of our university only and that distributing to others or using for non-university related work is violation of the license agreement and subject to copyright infringement laws. So "probably" is "definitely" at least in the US for all journals I've ever seen hosted by Springer and ScienceDirect.
We have such a folder, digitally. It has 2775 papers and counting.
@tpg2114: In contrast the university libraries I know here in Germany are all also public libraries - everyone can get a library card (with the exception of Jena, where non-university people officially need to be Thuringians - this is commented on as completely ridiculous) and really everyone can walk in and read it there (you may need a card for orders from the archives and for accessing the computer places).
@cbeleites I think Germany is something of a special case. From the very little I read while there, it seems to me that the government has basically bought public licences for everything. I'm not sure whether transmitting electronically to someone abroad would be allowed though.
@JessicaB: (non-private) universities are owned by the respective state, so federal government is in this only indirectly. Maybe 16 states decided to have public access to their university libraries. But also many research institutes give rather public access to their library (at least for reading, typically also for electronic journals), and many such institute libraries participate in large online catalogues (ZDB / GVK), which are actually not Germany-only but also have Austrian libraries.
... One thing that is maybe special in this respect is that Germany has a system where fees are collected from libraries, when buying copying/printer paper, copying machines etc. which are then distributed between publishers and authors. Copyright law here has an exception that allows single copies for research (making them yourself or having them made for you). But no, we're far from having access to everything. Our librarian does a fair amount of finding out who has the papers we can't access but need.
I would not explicitly acknowledge people who have helped you access papers that you don't have access to. As F'x pointed out, it's probably against the law, but it's unlikely to get you into trouble. The acknowledgement, however, creates more trouble than it needs to, because you're more or less explicitly stating that you got the journal in a clandestine way. So, I would just thank the person and leave it at that.
Definitely. If someone publicly thanked me for just giving them access to publications using my university's systems, I'd find it really awkward.
Well, it is anyways not the amount of work that would appropriately be thanked in the acknowledgements section of a paper. (Though I did thank our librarian for her outstanding help in the acknowledgments of my PhD thesis)
I think it predominately depends on how you are accessing the other university's resources.
If the resource is online and your collaborator grants you access either by sharing his username and password or through a network proxy, this is almost definitely in violation of computing guidelines of his university. To me asking him to knowingly violate a university policy, which is more or less reasonable, is ethically questionable.
If the resource is online and your collaborator downloads the resource directly, that isn't ethically questionable. If he then shares that material with you it may violate copyright law and it may be ethically questionable. If for example you chose as a collaborator/employee a student who has access to this resource then it is ethically questionable since collaborating with researchers outside the university is beyond the normal scope of a students "job" description and therefore they are likely misusing the resource. If you chose a member of academic research staff (or possibly a grad student) as a collaborator, then they are really doing there job by collaborating. I see no ethical issues with this. It might even make sense to include them in the acknowledgments of any resulting publication. Something along the lines of
I thank John Doe at the University of Good Library for help collecting
reference materials.
I think that it would be against the law almost everywhere (because, in general, Institutions subscribe the journal / publisher so that its students / researchers / etc will have access to the material. The subscription is based in many factors such as how many persons will have access, how "important" the Institution is and will cite the provided articles etc.
And the Institution would grant the students etc. the access based on the same contract. I don't think that any can give an unlimited right to make copies and distribute and so on.
So, who would be breaking the law / the contract ? The friend who provides such access, in the first place.
A point that "softens" this is the fair use, but it has a very tenue line where you (or your friend) is doing a fair use or not of that access.
A solution: have you asked the Library of your University if they have some agreement with the University of your friend? Sometimes one Library can ask for books / journals / articles / etc from other Universities.
Wouldnt your profs be aware of the data and speculate where u got it from given they couldn't access it and you didn't pay a lot to have access to it?
Perhaps you could ask whoever may share their opinions or any official info concerning the said journals; your professors, whoever allows the permission for the journals you can access (your library), the journals themselves, and certainly permission from the other universities whose service you'd access. Not your friends- otherwise if you believe it can be interpreted as theft- then maybe it is , as they are not getting any business from you. You'll never know the reason why your university was excluded in particular until you do your homework and choose the all clear approach. Perhaps it was in fact intentionally excluded and then in that case then obviously it could be unethical and illegal!
Surely your only helping your self out but journals are in the business of making money and i believe the ethical choice would be to know beyond a doubt.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.496077 | 2012-11-08T21:19:26 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5206",
"authors": [
"Charles Martin",
"DQdlM",
"Dipak Narigara",
"F'x",
"Fatemeh Esmaili",
"Fuhrmanator",
"Greg",
"Jessica B",
"Mikael Vejdemo-Johansson",
"Rachel Ferrigno",
"Taher M Sara",
"Trenin",
"cbeleites",
"dearN",
"drfrogsplat",
"epijim",
"gerrit",
"giacomotb",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/105653",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/105655",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10620",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13381",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13385",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13386",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13412",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13418",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13424",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13425",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14755",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20036",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/248",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35488",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3859",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3878",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/519",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/725",
"michael",
"tpg2114",
"user3458195"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
189351 | Is doing a favor for a professor in return for a favor strange?
I’m an undergraduate student and want to teach a workshop next semester, so I’m working with my school’s administration to get help with room reservations and stuff.
I have been bounced around between a few different head professors. Finally, I found the right one and got this email requesting my help with tutoring their friend’s daughter for an assignment:
Charles, I got your information - requesting to [start workshop next semester]. Let us talk about it in the coming days.
On unrelated note, my friend's daughter is [doing undergrad at X school]. She has requested for assignment help - private tutoring. If you have a hour or two today or tomorrow, it will be great to help her. This assignment is due [at time]. >
[Friend's daughter's name], if you have worked on these problems / have partial answers, you may want to share so that we can review and respond. Best wishes.
Is this weird? Will I get in trouble for cooperating?
@AzorAhai-him- United States, and faculty
@AzorAhai-him- the email reads as though he wouldn’t help me if I don’t do this unrelated favor for him, which doesn’t seem right. My ability to teach the workshop should be based on merit rather than readiness to do a favor. Not sure if I’d get in trouble or not for participating in the exchange at all, just seems like a no-no
Looks very strange. I would simply (politely) decline the tutoring and get back to the business at hand. They did specifically write unrelated so it's not rude/weird to expect to do exactly that. A quid pro quo type arrangement is unexpected and unprofessional.
For the question, could you clarify what "teach a workshop" means?
That is strange. But, do you think may be the professor only ask to see if you want to take a second job (tutorial) on the side (and he does not mean to force you to take the tutorial job) ?
If the assignment is due in a day or so, the chair may be struggling to find someone to help.
@mkennedy True, but not OP's problem.
Is it an opportunity for a paid tutoring gig that the prof is just passing along or more of a quid pro quo?
@BobBrown Of course. I was just wondering if that could be a reason why the professor made such a strange request (and that he may owe his friend a big favor).
There is a risk if you DON'T cooperate then your relationship with this professor is screwed, so regardless what "should" or "shouldn't" be happening, you need to evaluate how much the relationship with this professor is worth for finding rooms/running your workshop, and if for any reason that is worth lot, I would go ahead and help with this
It's not quite clear to me what kind of power the professor holds here - is the professor making a determination of whether you will be able to hold the workshop or not? Or is this just an administrative room scheduling issue that can't be realistically denied? The greater power the professor holds, the more problematic this becomes - this might not be a huge issue if you're asking him to rubber-stamp something, but certainly moreso if he's about to grade your term paper.
Yes, it’s wildly inappropriate for a professor to make such a request of a student who needs their help.
You can cooperate if you want, but maybe consider whether you want to be the kind of person who lets other people with more power manipulate him into doing their bidding. If this was a matter of life and death I might see a dilemma, but in this situation I have a feeling you could get your problem solved in a variety of other ways that don’t involve being a party to this sort of shady transaction. Good luck in any case!
I came back here to make this comment and I see that Buffy has written something similar in the comments on the question itself. While I agree with your answer, I wonder whether there's a misunderstanding. What would you, i.e. Dan Romik, think of OP asking how much this gig pays, alternatively writing, "My usual tutoring fee is $xx.xx per hour. OK?" That is, is there a misunderstanding caused by the juxtaposition of two unrelated requests?
@BobBrown I don’t see any ethical issue with OP offering to do the tutoring as a paid gig (assuming that’s a paid gig they’d actually be interested in), if that’s what you’re asking, but I don’t see how that’s related to your last sentence. There may be a misunderstanding, or there may be a savvy manipulator who is careful enough to leave themselves the exit route of claiming a “misunderstanding” in the event someone finds fault with their behavior. Which of those two scenarios is the true one is unknowable given the currently available information.
(Regardless, the professor should not have sent an email phrased in such a way, even if the reason he sent it is utter cluelessness rather having unethical intent. So I stand by what I said about the behavior being wildly inappropriate.)
Intent is not an element to professional ethics violations, only an aggravating factor. Failure to understand that they are in a position of extreme power (handling an active request) and throwing in an "unrelated" major request is unethical, period. The minimal not-clearly-unethical would be (1) sending the request under separate cover (2) as a paid offer. Why on earth is the friend's daughter on the email?
@obscurans interesting, but could you support your claim about intent with a reference? Just adding “period” at the end of a sentence does not automatically make it true, period.
Thanks. The "juxtaposition" I referred to is the offer of a tutoring assignment, perhaps paid, or perhaps not, along with what appears to be an offer to help OP with the event. After several-re-readings, I've come around to your way of thinking. By now it's probably too late, but I still think OP should have quoted a fee for the tutoring.
@DanRomik AAUP position Professors demonstrate respect for students as individuals and adhere to their proper roles as intellectual guides and counselors. [...] They avoid any exploitation, harassment, or discriminatory treatment of students.
"Unintentional" harassment is universally recognized as harassment - effect on the recipient controls. Same with discrimination. Same with exploitation. Academic freedom isn't the same as ethical freedom - if you're debateably unethical, you're already wrong.
The thing that makes this email strange (and a bit inapproriate when juxtaposed with the fact that you need them to help you) is that it does not specify the tutoring to be paid work, and therefore implicitly looks like a request for free labour. If the professor intended to offer you an opportunity for paid tutoring work then they probably view that as an opportunity for you, rather than a request for a gratis service.
So yes, the email is strange, and it is a bad look. It is possible that the professor just did not take due care to give all the relevant details and didn't notice this when sending. I would recommend interpreting the email charitably, and assuming that the professor hadn't thought about the appropriate amount of money for the tutoring because they see it as a transaction that does not involve them. Alternatively, perhaps the professor does not know how much money the friend intends for the tutoring, and so expects you to get the ball rolling on money discussions if you're interested in the work. As to how to proceed, if you want some paid tutoring work, you could pick an appropriate figure to charge and then write back and offer to tutor for that amount; if you don't want the tutoring work, just decline or ignore the request.
To add to this answer, why would any professor extort a random student to obtain something that is of entirely marginal benefit to them? Does anyone actually believe that a friend's daughter's homework assignment is so important to this professor that they need to bend a random student's arm over it? A much more likely explanation is that it didn't even occur to them that their email could be construed this way. Yes, the email is weird, but so is reading it as an attempt at extortion.
@AdamPrenosil: I agree 90% with your comment (+1), but there are sometimes cases where managers in enterprises add on little jobs for their subordinates (or others like students who need their help) that go beyond the scope of legitimate work for the employer. Yes, the benefit is marginal (e.g., pick up my dry-cleaning, feed my cat, tutor my friend's daughter) but this type of practice is not unheard of. I think that's why people look at an email like that with suspicion.
The key problem I see is that while the OP is not getting a direct response to their question, just the vague suggestion they'll "talk" in the "coming days", the (unbelievably) "unrelated" question of tutoring his friend's daughter comes up to be done in the next day or two.
This seems like an almost explicit condition for talking to the student.
There's the breach of confidentiality as well, but I'd personally consider this a disciplinary hearing level of abuse of authority. Someone working for me would be have their work emails checked for a pattern of such abuse in the past. I'd be contacting former students to see if they were put under similar pressure.
At the very minimum this would (from me) generate a formal warning letter related to ethical appearance as well as practice. It's not enough to be ethical, you have to be seen to be ethical in such a position.
"She has requested for assignment help - private tutoring"
"This assignment is due [at time]."
These are absolutely shocking lines. It's practically an admission that the professor expects the student to complete the assignment for her.
We've seen many scandals about wealthy people's kids having work done for them and even having exams done by other people. Let's not be naive about how bad this email looks.
And I don't think anyone in a position of power like this gets much benefit of the doubt. They should be avoiding this exact kind of communication like the plague.
In short, this (IMO) stinks.
Someone suggested it's a marginal benefit to the professor, which is not really true as it could be a case of arranging free "tutoring" for someone else in return for some other favor. That, I regret to say, is how some people conduct their "business".
You're making a lot of speculative inferences based on next to no information and treating them as fact. The inference from the fact that the prof writes "This assignment is due [at time]" to "an admission that the professor expects the student to complete the assignment for her" is particularly strange. Yes, people in positions of authority should take care to appear ethical in addition to also acting ethically, but you're taking the uncharitable interpretation to the extreme imo. It's not even clear that the professor has the authority to deny the student's request if they are displeased.
@AdamPřenosil We're going to have to agree to disagree. My view is that basically all of these statements individually are "bad smelling", so to speak, but the combination is just awful. I find it hard to believe any of us would not be furious to find someone under us wrote such an email. Remember it's not enough to not be caught doing something unethical, these days you have to have a clean appearance as well, and this is a long way from clean looking. Many businesses would fire someone on the spot for such a letter. YMMV of course, but that's my view.
Even if it were of marginal/no benefit to the professor, it's still a wildly inappropriate way to make such a "request" for all the other reasons you pointed out. If anything, it would be even less clear why the professor is doing this if they're getting little or nothing out of it.
Yes, I consider the message weird for several reasons.
Apparently, the message is addressed both at you and the professor's friend's daughter. This is very inappropriate, as it's a breach of privacy: it is of no concern to the professor's friend's daughter that the professor and you are in negotiations about teaching a workshop.
Since the message has been addressed both to you and the professor's friend's daughter, she is aware of the fact that the professor has asked you to help her. This is an impolite act of the professor, because he's put you into a potentially face-threatening situation: as the recipient of the request is immediately involved, it may be harder for you to refuse than it would be otherwise.
Even though the passage of the message in which you're asked a favor is prefaced by "unrelatedly", the message may be read as an implied quid pro quo – as you say in the title, it may be interpreted as asking you a favor (to assist his friend's daughter) in the expectation that you feel obliged because you have received a favor (support in teaching a workshop). If this was indeed the intention, would be very unethical behavior, and you may even argue that it was a kind of extortion given the power imbalance between the professor and you.
The message doesn't mention payment – only "private tutoring". This omission is either unprofessional (if it was simply an oversight) or exploitative (if the favor is indeed intended as unpaid tutoring).
What I would do in response to a message like this is this: I'd simply delay my answer until the deadline for the assignment has passed. Given that all this appears to be on very short notice, a delay of a day might be enough, and would still be within a completely acceptable response time. Then, in the reply, I'd say something along the lines of
Sorry, I was kept very busy yesterday due to [valid reason that doesn't reflect negatively on me]. I sincerely hope that [professor's friend's daughter] was still able to complete the assignment without my assistance.
The rest of my response would be about the workshop, and not the tutoring offer.
Nice answer and +1, but about your suggested email reply, I would not advise OP to either apologize (“sorry”), explain or excuse the totally normal delay in response time (“I was kept very busy”), or address the friend’s daughter’s tutoring need in a way that implies that OP might have been willing to help had it not been for being busy (“I hope she was still able to complete the assignment without my assistance”). When someone tries to manipulate you, just say no or ignore the request and you minimize the risk of getting drawn into their web of manipulations in the future.
Of course this is inappropriate: Someone in a position of power is demanding a personal favor from a subordinate in exchange for doing their own job. The "unrelated note" they mention is not actually an unrelated note, in the same way that it wouldn't be unrelated if you said, "Sure, I'd be happy to tutor your friend's daughter. On an unrelated note, I'm going to busy next week, and it sure would be nice if I got an extension on the upcoming homework assignment." (Or, on the stick rather than the carrot side, "You've got a nice business here. It sure would be a shame if something were to... happen to it.") It's a quid pro quo outside the normal professional relationship a professor is supposed to have with their students.
That having been said, the professor may just be unaware of how unprofessional this is. They're in a position of power over their subordinates; undergrads and grad students are completely dependent on professors and have very little recourse in situations like this. Maybe they're used to getting undeserved perks or think they actually deserve them. (For that matter, I've run into more egregious demands along these lines, though they're not things I can post about in public.)
Unfortunately, there's not much you can do in this situation--- which is exactly why it persists. You can decline, but that's possibly going to sour your relationship with the professor and block you from getting the workshop. (And no, the professor isn't going to explicitly say that they're denying you the workshop for that reason, but that doesn't mean it isn't actually the reason.) It may also sour your relationship with other professors; they do talk among themselves, and you're not going be around for those conversations to defend yourself. Going to the head of the department or other administration figures would be a waste of time; no department is going to throw a professor under the bus for an undergrad without much more egregious and much more explicit evidence.
So, unfortunately, that means you're stuck deciding whether teaching your seminar and cultivating good relationships in the department are worth a bit of sleaziness and graft. It's unfortunate, but welcome to academia.
"Sure, I'd be happy to tutor your friend's daughter. On an unrelated note, I'm going to busy next week, and it sure would be nice if I got an extension on the upcoming homework assignment." – I would be very curious to see how he'd respond if the asker did reply with that... (Though I wouldn't actually recommend replying in this way.)
Just apply Hanlon's razor here, and be positive.
If you are interested in the private tutoring, you can write (of course adjust to the specifics):
Thank you for the reply I am happy to join. Let’s talk end of the week.
About the private tutoring, I am glad to help, and tomorrow looks good. Should I negotiate the rate directly with (daughters name) or (friend name)?
Only send this reply to your professor, so if Hanlon's razor failed and he wants out of that, he can do it in a facesaving way.
Academicians are often very busy people. I interpret this as he sees you are suitable for tutoring since you are interested in that workshop and take action. Thus he refers you to that person as a possible tutor. One email to you both probably means I don't want to get involved, do whatever you want. When there is exploitation going on, you will receive a different email while the other person gets something else.
I am almost sure what he/she is after is to get rid of this chore, not to get a service for free. I sometimes get requests like that, though I will, in person, advice my student not to do it for free, just to make sure they will not misunderstand it. It is not a direct favor, but I am just trying to get rid of the request and in the meanwhile I am giving better students a chance to earn some bucks. I think this might be the case here.
I think it will be a good idea to take on the task, asking some tutoring charge, something that is not excessive (if you ask too much it will strain the relationship between your professor and his/her friend) or immediately respond you will not be able to help due to some reason. Only accept if you are sure you can handle the task.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.496904 | 2022-10-05T15:47:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/189351",
"authors": [
"Adam Přenosil",
"Ben",
"Bob Brown",
"Buffy",
"Charles Averill",
"Dan Romik",
"Job_September_2020",
"Nuclear Hoagie",
"Sidharth Ghoshal",
"StephenG - Help Ukraine",
"V2Blast",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/122238",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123121",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/125186",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/128654",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16183",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34226",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39510",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41923",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/5711",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74137",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94316",
"mkennedy",
"obscurans",
"user2705196"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
160164 | Two students having separate topics chose to use the same paper format
Two students decided to consult each other about term paper formatting, because the teacher didn't provide guidance on the format. They used the same format, but different topics and totally different content on the subject matter. Is deciding to use the same format plagiarism?
Seems pretty unlikely. Double spaced, single tab indent, Elite typewriter font seems pretty universal in the old days. The content is the issue, not the format (unless you use Comic Sans, but plagarism isn't the issue there).
Unless choosing or designing a format is a part of their assessment, you could avoid this in the future by requiring a standard format such as APA or MLA.
What do you mean by same format? Do you mean the physical layout on the page? Or do you mean the same basic headers/sections? If it's the latter, could they have found the same reference in their research? If they googled "basic outline for research paper" (or something) they would have very similar looking formats.
A kindergarten question, and seven kindergärtners answering, and getting highly voted for it. ?!?
Interesting. I wonder if this is a way to catch plagiarism: As an instructor, you don't give a uniform format for students to follow. Then watch out for similar formatting for a possible sign of plagiarism - if they copied format, then check if they maybe also copied content ?
@Karl What do you think of Is doing two PhDs a good path?
No.
If using the same format were plagiarism, then almost every article published in a journal is plagiarizing, since they all have the same format. Plagiarism happens when some kind of intellectual idea is involved, and the format used is not an intellectual idea.
"and the format used is not an intellectual idea" isn't that a bit too general? Can't actual templates be subject of copyright?
You'd be hard pressed to find a template that makes sense for which there is no prior art.
@Džuris Copyright and plagiarism aren't the same. There may easily be a copyright on, e.g., a Latex template, but that would still not make using this template without attribution plagiarism in the academic sense.
If so, then everyone choosing to use a predefined LaTeX format would be guilty of plagarism. Many journals provide their own, universities provide them for theses and dissertations, some instructors even provide them for papers & homework. Indeed, do you know that the students actually consulted or created a format, rather than simply used the same template?
This is absolutely not plagiarism, unless the topic of the class was design related. The template used to format a paper is irrelevant to the evaluation of the paper's actual content. Students share format templates and download such templates from the internet all the time. Microsoft Word itself comes with numerous templates for various kinds of documents. None of these are problematic.
Imagine if this wasn't the case. That would be a lot of very disconcerting information.
Even if the topic is design related, copying a term paper design may be cheating on a homework assignment, but almost certainly not plagiarism.
Even if the topic is design related, as long as it's not the design of the paper itself, it should not be considered anywhere near "plagiarism", when the paper is only a medium, not the content.
I don't see how the formatting could be subject to plagiarism if formatting/design itself is not a topic of a paper.
Note 1: However, I can see how similar/same formatting can be used as an additional consideration when deciding on an actual academic misconduct case.
Note 2: Consider explicit instructions of the teacher:
This is an individual project. Do not consult each other on any subject regarding this paper.
And two students use a very distinct template and [for easiness of this post] admit discussion the choice of the template with each other. Even in this case, it is not plagiarism; however, the students slightly violated the "letter of the law" (whether the "law" is lawful and reasonable is outside of the scope) regarding the project. But I believe the "spirit of the law" is to not penalize the students for this at all.
Are they being graded on their report template?
If constructing a template forms part of the coursework, and the template structure (have you nested styles? used appropriate "keep with next" on headers? and so on) is submitted and forms part of the marking scheme, then yes this would be plagiarism.
If they're being graded on the content of their report, and the most that happens with the template is that they might be docked some marks if it prevents the report being understood, then of course it isn't plagiarism. Plagiarism involves copying graded/evaluated content. Unless this is a course on how to use Word, the template isn't part of that.
So it would be plagiarism to use LaTex to format the paper, if there was any marks awarded based on how the paper looked?
@Ian If the course was teaching you how to use LaTeX and part of the coursework was to construct your own language style, it certainly would be possible to plagiarise someone else's work. If writing a template is not part of the content of your course, then of course not. Like I said, if the only requirement for the template is that it makes the content comprehensible, then it's not relevant.
It wouldn't be "plagiarism" in this case either. That's like saying it's "plagiarism" to copy first-graders' sums-of-numbers exercise answers. It's not something novel enough to count. ... unless, that is, the homework involves some complex LaTeX trickery or something, but I really doubt it.
Short answer, no. Longer answer, I took a class last semester in which I had to write several papers or several paragraph essay style answers. I don’t think the professor ever required a specific format, but he always insisted that the papers have things such as indented paragraphs and a reference page so, formatting was the student’s choice. I always wrote my papers in Google Docs and used the MLA template provided and I know that others in my class did as well. The vast majority of the papers we did write were run through Turnitin - which checks for plagiarism - never set off any alarm bells for plagiarism either using the MLA or APA formatted templates.
Now, I am also certified in my state here in the US to teach Emergency Medical Technician courses and, as such, could end up encountering situations where plagiarism could be an issue. I would not consider using an identical format any type of plagiarism, particularly if it were one of the “big” paper writing formats like APA or MLA. Perhaps if I had specified to each and every student that they must, independently create their own format, then I’d raise an eyebrow at students with identical formats.
Ask yourself why plagiarism is forbidden. It is usually for a few main reasons:
falsely amplifying a supposed "fact" without having done any work yourself is evil on epistemological grounds, because it leads others to think there is more evidence in favour of something than actually exists;
pretending to have more intellectual ability than in fact you have is epistemologically evil again, because it leads people to believe that your other output is better-grounded than it really is;
humans are social animals who do not take kindly to being deprived of the credit for their work (and indeed the incentives of our societal systems may become even more misaligned than they already are, when work is routinely uncredited).
Merely copying someone's formatting only violates one of those reasons if the formatting itself is a key subject of the work.
Could they have worked together on a previous project? It is very rare to create new templates, and if they worked together last academic year, they might just both have kept the same template?
Even if they haven't: it is a very strict interpretation of plagarism for "sharing Word template" without any actual content to be plagarism.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.498506 | 2020-12-17T22:33:42 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/160164",
"authors": [
"BCLC",
"Džuris",
"Graham",
"Ian",
"Jon Custer",
"Karl",
"Mad Physicist",
"Marianne013",
"ThisClark",
"corsiKa",
"einpoklum",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14144",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34571",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41035",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43789",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45983",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74849",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85644",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/877",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9902",
"iBug",
"jamesqf",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
13731 | How long typically are paper reviews? Is there such a thing as “too long”?
When you review papers submitted for publication, is there an “optimal” length for reviews?
In my experience as an author and referee, I have seen a large range of review lengths (for reference, a paper in my field is typically between 3 and 8 printed pages):
Zero length: for some of the papers I have authored, the reviewer just clicked the “accept as is” or “reject” checkmark on the review sheet, without adding any comment (at least, not any comment visible to me). It's not so common, but it has happened.
Short length: a lot of time, I received reviews who consisted of a single paragraph.
Medium: one full page, maybe two pages.
Although I have never received any such long reviews, I have myself written on a few occasions reviews that exceed two pages, including once or twice a four or five-page review. These were cases where the paper was good, but could be (in my view) much improved and some of the aspects/consequences had escaped the authors' consideration.
I am wondering how useful reviews of various length are to editors. I often consider that “unmotivated” reviews are useless, as they do not give any real insight about the paper to the editor. For example, if the editor gets two conflicting non motivated reviews, how is she to decide?
On the other hand, although I write some from time to time, I have never received long reviews, so… is this something frowned upon?
I'm not an editor but as an author, I certainly prefer a long review full of detailed suggestions to a one-line "your paper does not meet quality standards, reject". Sometimes a reviewer ends up contributing more to a paper, than one of the "minor" co-authors.
I know one of the journal reviews went on for a year and finally the author had to push the reviewers a lot to get the final results. This is the longest I have seen.
@user2915398 I was thinking in term of length of the written review, not time-wise
This is awesome! I have been wondering about that as well. And may I suggest the answerer to also mention if you are speaking as an editor or not? I value all inputs and tips but would also love to know some norm from the people in the industry.
Reviews can be of quite varying length but obviously the extremes indicate some problems.
A review consisting of "Accept as is" would be highly suspicious in my mind (as an editor). It usually means the reviewer has not done any work, essentially no manuscript is that close to perfect (although it may of course happen). A review of "Reject" without additional comment is equally pointless (I am then assuming the journal has some form of quality check before accepting for review). An absence of comments is just a big warning sign since there is no perspective on why the MS is either perfect or perfectly worthless.
Considering the length of a review, it is governed by two factors: the quality of the manuscript and the personality of the reviewer. To some extent longer reviews indicate more questions to be resolved. At the same time some reviewers may be more nit-picking than others so that also influences the length. Based on my experience as an editor, I would say, as a rule of thumb, that at least a page of (single spaced) comments would be a basis for a descent review for a normal manuscript (15-20 pages double spaced excluding references, tables, figures) in the field experiment/observation based science where I work. A review of more than three or four pages of (single spaced) comments would be unusual and probably involve comments down to spelling issues. "A decent review" involves providing clear and constructive comments that will allow the editor to value the manuscript and the author to improve the manuscript.
So I would not say that a long review would necessarily be frowned upon, it clearly depends on how constructive it is. If someone spends a lot of effort improving language and grammar (which does not necessarily constitute the expectations from a review) that could be very useful. Normally such comments may be made as revisions in a file rather than a written report. So length is not a major issue, constructiveness is.
As an editor, how do you handle zero length reviews? If the review just says "accept" or "reject", do you grudgingly follow the reviewer's advice, or do you look for another reviewer?
Most likely add another reviewer. The least one can do as a reviewer is to justify why one makes the recommendation. It does not necessarily have to be a long justification, but should provide a perspective on the paper and why it should be accepted/rejected.
Speaking from the point of view of an editor: One of the best reviews I ever got was longer than the paper. The author, a young researcher, had proved three theorems, one of which I recognized as a known result. So I asked the original discoverer of that known result to referee the paper. In my cover letter, I mentioned that I recognized one of the theorems as his, and asked whether the other two theorems had enough novelty for a publication. It turned out that the other two theorems weren't new either. The referee could easily have just given citations for those two theorems and recommended rejection. Instead, he gave me (or, really, gave the author) a long, clear explanation of the state of the art in that subject, and he suggested some open problems that the author could try working on.
I at least once wrote a review longer than the manuscript itself. The paper pushed some buttons of mine, and I couldn't stop writing. (Similarities with answers of mine here at Academia.SE are coincidental.) I think I recommended rejection and explained in considerable detail the non-trivial error the authors had fallen into. The editor appears to have appreciated this review; he still has me review regularly and introduces me as "the guy that writes reviews longer than the original paper."
An "accept as is" option is useful after resubmissions; it signifies that no more work needs to be done. However, it is unusual to see that happen in an article on the first round of submissions. (I've had that happen precisely once in my career.)
Otherwise, I would say that the more detailed a review can be, and the more precise the suggestions for improving the paper are, the better it will be.
One to two pages is typically the norm; however, I have submitted a few three- to four-page reviews when I thought an article was already quite good, but could be better.
On the other hand, if a paper is already of relatively poor quality, I will explain the methodological or other significant flaws, but skip over an analysis of minute points; (it's simply not worth the time to rearrange the furniture when the roof is going to collapse any minute.)
As an author, reviewer, and key reader of a respected engineering journal, I can offer some perspective. The shortest review I received was one I solicited from a highly-respected professor at a prestigious university. His review was basically “This manuscript is not written well enough to be reviewed.”
The longest review I have received as an author was about five bulleted comments some of which were optional revisions and some minor but necessary clarifications; the shortest was one minor comment approving the manuscript.
As a reviewer I have on several occasions completely rewritten a non-English language author’s manuscript as a gratis professional service. To my surprise, I received thank you letters from the professional society publications chair and the editor thanking me for my ‘laudatory’ service. I took that to indicate my effort was unusual.
My shortest key reader review summary was to a VERY famous author who after a 22 page derivation, which he summarized as ‘simple’. With feigned seriousness, I ‘required him to remove the word ‘simple’ since he was on this uncustmary occasion communicating with mortals.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.499244 | 2013-10-30T08:57:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13731",
"authors": [
"Aequitas",
"F'x",
"Nate Eldredge",
"Penguin_Knight",
"Peter Jansson",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"anotherwise",
"gerrit",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1010",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1033",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35354",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35355",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35356",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35363",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35386",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35407",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63001",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6450",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9220",
"kaay",
"lennyklb",
"pumpkin popper",
"rajudev",
"thecoder98",
"user2915398"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
13079 | What corrections can you make on galley proofs?
When I receive galley proofs of a paper, I look at possible errors introduced by the copy-editing team. But while I proofread the article, there are sometimes small mistakes I'd like to fix, which were not introduced by them (i.e. they were already present in the accepted version of the manuscript).
Usually, the proofs are accompanied by instructions saying that extensive changes should not be introduced at that time, and any such changes would have to be approved by the editor (hence, I suppose, delaying publication). However, the limit is not very clear to me. What is considered extensive changes? In particular, what do you think of the following items (from my experience):
Slight changes in wording, to improve clarity
Updating a citation, because an “in press” or “ASAP” article now has page numbers
Adding an important (but not crucial) citation one had missed, in the introduction
Adding a citation to a paper that has been published since the manuscript was submitted; possibly adding a short sentence to the text
What I have done so far is change everything that I think should be changed to improve the paper (including all the above items), and let the typesetter decide whether he wanted to send it back to the editor. I never received any complaint or comment on my changes, which could indicate that it was the correct course of action.
A galley proof should primarily be proofed for typos or mistakes made in the type-setting process. It is not the time to change phrasing, exchange figures, add or remove blocks of text or anything else substantial.
Adding references might seem like a useful addition but the problem is that it would then be possible to add references without the knowledge of the editors and of course the reviewers and hence possibly make changes that could have affected reviews etc. The case of adding anew paper is a similar problem since it may change the paper in ways that the editor and reviewers have not seen and therefore ok'd. If such changes are wanted (they are probably seldom needed), it would be best to at least check with the editor if that would be appropriate. In short, no changes should be made that alters the content of the paper. All such details should have been checked and if necessary corrected before submitting the final revised manuscript for copy-editing and proof production. Any corrections called for by the copy-editor and editors after submitting the final version is of course to be made.
Updating of references are usually also acceptable, to, for example, add the publication year (from e.g. "in press") or adding doi, page numbers etc. if these were not known at the time the final version was submitted.
The proofing stage is not a stage where many changes should be made. The manuscript that is submitted for proofing should be considered the last chance to make any substantial changes. What many do not realize is that all changes done after a type-set proof has been produced may cost the journal money, apart from the extra time and trouble it causes. So, as an editor, I often have the feeling authors just send in their final manuscript without checking figures and text properly and then waiting for the proof to make final changes but is, in fact, an abuse of the system.
Regarding your last paragraph, the type-setter is usually not a scientist and has no idea of what changes might mean so to think that the type-setter would act as some form of intermediate editor is not right. In cases where type-setting is done in-house it might be a professional doing the type-setting but I would still say this is not the way to handle the type-setting/proofing stage.
So, anyone, make sure the final submitted manuscript is checked, complete and correct.
Checking the final manuscript is necessary, but it doesn't in itself answer the question: things may have come to light after the final submission, which could not have been foreseen (a new paper coming out, e.g.). But the rest of the answer is useful, given your experience as editor.
All the cases you mention (minor wording changes, updating/adding references) seem entirely fine to me. It's best to do this only when it's important, but in my experience it's standard and acceptable. Peter Jansson's answer suggests what's acceptable might vary between fields or journals, however. (His point about making changes after reviewing is valid, but I'm not so worried if the changes are relatively minor.) All I can talk about is my experience in mathematics as an author and editor.
The book Mathematics Into Type (first published by the American Mathematical Society in 1971, and last updated in 1999) says the following on pages 53-54:
If an author makes changes in first proof amounting to more than 10% of the original cost of composition, these changes are usually considered excessive. Many publishers ask authors to bear the costs in excess of 10%. These excessive correction charges may be the result of large sections of text being deleted or of changes in wording or notation.
This agrees with my memory of the traditional standard for excessive changes. It's not clear what, if anything, this 10% figure means nowadays, or how widely it's used (although web searches lead to some mentions of it in guides for authors). I wouldn't take it too seriously, but it does give an indication of what was considered acceptable in the past. Note that it didn't mean you could rewrite 5% of the article, since those changes would require resetting a lot of the surrounding text as well, but it meant you had some flexibility for making a few small changes.
Going back further, in 1943 the AMS said this:
It is important that galley proofs be carefully read and corrected by the author, since it is only the author who can detect errors which are due to an imperfect manuscript.
So at least back then the official AMS position was that authors should correct their own mistakes when reading proofs, and not just new mistakes introduced by the typesetter. (I don't know of more recent references that discuss this explicitly.)
Of course I agree with Peter Jansson that articles should be carefully checked at the time the final version is submitted, with changes to the proofs being considered a last resort rather than an opportunity to delay the checking.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.500045 | 2013-09-29T18:37:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/13079",
"authors": [
"B Chin",
"F'x",
"Michael",
"Mrinal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2700",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33352",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33355",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33357",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/33359",
"user232183"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
211049 | How can I help a PhD student who's dead-set on keeping methodologically wrong results?
I am helping a STEM PhD student with a statistical approach they developed for a key thesis chapter. Unfortunately, the approach is fundamentally flawed and makes no statistical sense. (I'm a freelancer with a statistics PhD and first got this as a programming job before finding the issues.)
I've tried to explain why the approach won't work, but to no avail. The person keeps on looking for workarounds, which I know won't work either. The approach should be ditched entirely.
What's a reasonable solution in such cases? Should I suggest potential alternatives for the chapter—and I can think of a few? If so, how should I proceed ethically?
There is a related question, focusing on a midterm marking.
Added in response to comments:
The job began as statistical programming help, which I later discovered to be for the client’s PhD (as usual, the initial job details were scant). The student client is the one paying; I’m unaware of the funding source. My previous academic clients obtained university grants to cover the fees and noted my contributions, primarily code, in their thesis or paper acknowledgements. For me personally, correct execution is a matter of professional ethics. I also do not wish to abet violations of academic ethics.
Are you their advisor or otherwise have a say in accepting their thesis?
You note that the student will need sign-off from their advisor for their wrong approach. So: what's the advisor's stance in this situation?
One possibility would be for them to post their approach at CrossValidated and solicit feedback. There are some statistical experts there. Perhaps they could sway your student.
The relationship s a little unclear. You're doing a statistical "programming job" for this person's PhD? Are you paid by the student, or someone else? Will you be an author? Is this a common arrangement? Is there a question of professional ethics if you execute on a flawed methodology?
@DanielR.Collins Important questions, thanks! I've amended my post.
Does it "invalidate the overall findings"? Is it OK to have a PhD thesis with shortcomings and inaccuracies?
How obvious is the problem in the student's approach? I can imagine that in some fields even the advisor might not be cognizant enough about the finer points of statistics. In a STEM field you would expect that not to be the case, but...
LEAD. HORSE. WATER. DRINK.
@JyrkiLahtonen: I have seen lots of extremely bad statistics happening in psychology, which I am most exposed to, and psychology students get treated to two full semesters of stats. Medicine is worse. Statistical understanding in biology is so mind-blowingly inexistent that I recently put out a call on LinkedIn to please consult a statistician before you run your animal tests, because you may well kill animals only to have utterly unusable data afterwards, which any statistician could have told you beforehand by a glance at your project plan. (Based on a question at CV.)
My concern exactly @StephanKolassa. The teacher of my only relevant course warned us (while explaining basic statistical testing of hypotheses) about medical professionals coming to us with data based on N=17, asking for a stamp of statistical signfigance. I did keep the lesson in mind when carrying out telcomm simulations.
Beyond suggesting that they speak with their advisor about it, you have probably done all that you can do. You can't force someone to take good advice.
If you suggest alternatives, I'd make the statements general. If you give minimal advice that they can follow up on it will benefit their learning. Don't do their work for them. Suggesting directions is the proper course, even for their advisor.
--
Edited to add: An advisor can and should certainly stop a student from taking a wrong direction. They have both the authority and responsibility to do so. They can also point to a better path, but they shouldn't provide solutions to the student's problems. They should let the student work out the solutions for themselves. That is also my advice to faculty in general when approached by students with questions. Let the student find their own insights.
The OP here doesn't have the authority, but should still respect the learning of the person by not doing their work for them.
+1 Though "Suggesting directions is the proper course, even for their advisor" is not enough for the advisor in case the student uses the wrong methodology. I am usually quite "laissez faire"-oriented, but it is the adviser's job to nip scientific malpractice in the bud. In the case here, as an advisor, I would make a very strong point not to do this. If that doesn't help, I would tell the student to keep me off the author list. If that is a persistent pattern, I would also suggest that the student gets an advisor whom they are prepared to listen to. OP, however, has none of these recourses.
@CaptainEmacs, I agree, actually, but saying "NO" is different from doing their work for them. Put them on the path, but don't walk them down it.
I understand you now. Perhaps make that more unambiguous?
A slight complication: the student’s PhD is not in statistics, but that thesis part requires intricate and specialist stats. In any case, except for the most basic outlines of alternatives, I’ll require approval of their PhD supervisor.
It doesn't matter that the thesis isn't in statistics. If the error brings the results into question it is a serious issue.
Re "you have probably done all that you can do": Well, you can write a CYA letter (and have them sign it (for having read and understood it))
After a certain amount of pushback, the next natural question is, at what point will you remove yourself - and most importantly, your name - from this work? It appears as if this person is disinterested in taking the proper steps to rectify this matter. If that is the case, then I would say it is obviously time to part ways.
My current instinct is that the person created and got wedded to what they thought was a brilliant theory. Now it’s hard to come to terms that it’s not the case. And it’s also big efforts to change course.
Step away as soon as you're convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that you won't be able to change their mind (or that their supervisor won't force them to follow your advice) (you could tell the student that you're happy to resume the work if they change their mind, e.g. if their thesis examiners force them to drop the improper approach — although by that time it will probably be quite painful for the student ...)
The proper venues for expressing your doubts about a student's work is in supervision /progress meetings. If you're not part of those meetings, then all you can do is try to convince your PhD student client, or ask them to let you make your case in their supervision meetings.
Of course, there is always a venue for a scientific critique of their work: you could publish an article or commentary stating your case. If the consequences of the student publishing a flawed article are high, you could consider doing that.
One important thing to consider is that you might be wrong (I doubt it, but it's not impossible). If you believe that the approach is flawed, then you can withdraw as a coauthor or named contributor.
FYI, under the CRediT authorship model, programming software qualifies you for authorship, so check if the journal subscribes to that model!
The simple approach is 'the customer is always right'. You gave them advise but they chose to ignore it. They are paying you so it is their problem, not yours.
Now you said you see it as problematic for your professional ethics if this methology is used as is. In that case I would recommend talking to the student and telling them you would like to talk to their advisor about the issue. A three-way talk is fine, a one-on-one with the advisor works as well.
First, it seems a bit unusual to me that a PhD student is paying someone external for statistics help. This could be fine, depends on the area but then the PhD advisor should definitely be aware of this and probably will also be the source of the money.
If the advisor is not involved with this this would be a major red flag for me.
If the advisor knows about your involvement they can respond to your advise and the students argument. Even if they don't have the statistics knowledge to decide the case they know that you have that technical knowledge, that is what you where hired for. So let the advisor arbitrate (and depending on the results decide whether you want to continue working with them).
And get it in writing?
It sounds like you have already done what you can to help the situation. It is not your job or responsibility to force a correction. If the method is flawed to the extent you say then the PhD advisor and/or committee should catch it and force a correction. Get paid for your work this far and disengage.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.500648 | 2024-06-01T13:51:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/211049",
"authors": [
"Ben Bolker",
"Buffy",
"Captain Emacs",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"EvilSnack",
"Jyrki Lahtonen",
"Mazura",
"Peter Mortensen",
"Stephan Kolassa",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/105411",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/139393",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/17484",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4140",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/473",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53810",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73551",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"schrödingcöder"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
175209 | Frustration with machine learning and deep learning research
I am doing a M.Sc. in artificial intelligence (AI), and I am collaborating with a computer vision company in a deep learning (DL) research project that will eventually become my master thesis.
Basically, my project is trying an approach that could, hopefully, achieve better results than the approach that is already in use in the company. (For those familiar with deep learning, I try to generate synthetic data for a task where data acquisition is expensive.)
However, after a lot of time and effort spent on this approach I see that the results are terrible. This new approach gives me worse rather than better results than the existing one, which means that at this moment all the effort has been a waste of time.
I feel stuck as I can't make any progress. Every single idea that I have that could potentially lead to improvements makes no difference. This is even worse than if I had worse results as in this case I could at least know what doesn't work. I feel that it is very hard to get any additional knowledge on this task as the experiments that I do don't validate any hypotheses. After months of working on this model, it still seems to me a complete black box.
As a result I end up working much more hours than agreed on in the contract, only to fail in generating any relevant new information or progress that I could report to my boss/advisor. I am spending a lot of time reviewing the code thinking that there must be something wrong.
Sometimes I wonder if my whole project is simply doomed to fail. Maybe this idea is simply not doable for the current task. And even though I feel that my advisor is aware of this danger, I can't help but feel that a failure of this project is a failure of me as a professional. After all, how can I be sure that I tried everything or that I correctly implemented those ideas?
Before this I was sure that being a AI researcher was the career that I wanted to follow. But now I feel that I can't cope with this level of anxiety and frustration. If it is like this for a M.Sc. project, I wonder how it would be for a Ph.D.
Did anyone have a similar experience in DL or even in another area? Can anyone with a Ph.D. share some thoughts whether things will continue to be like that?
"All effort was a waste of time." Not true. You learnt something about your model/method, even if it was not what you wanted or expected to learn. It sounds like you are not getting much help from your advisor. How often do you meet them? What kind of feedback do they give you?
This sort of thing is unfortunately common. Things should work, but don’t, and there could be so many reasons why: the algorithm, the implementation, the data, … Sometimes a second set of eyes is needed, nearly always a thorough code review is in order. Talk to an experienced colleague to see if any of your core assumptions are misplaced. Debugging gets quicker with experience.
Deep learning needs real data and 2. Synthetic data generation is often in the realm of graphics or physical modeling, this problem is probably one outside of ML. I was on a similar project and opted to terminate.
In my experience most of research is about failure, it happens to all of us, all the time. Some failed efforts help you go in the right direction, and some are just dead ends that only get you frustrated. You might learn to tolerate failure and cope with it as you gain experience (also to identify dead ends quicker), but it will not go away. Talk to your supervisor to figure out whether this particular project is failing spectacularly and you can expect better times ahead. If not, then you need to assess if you're willing to put up with the frustration.
Research projects fail all the time: that’s why it’s called research rather than homework.
I think you are plunging right into the heart of the most hyped topic in the field. Get the AIMA book and read it cover to cover. There are so many topics and subtopics there. Make sure you understand the whole landscape before you choose what to pursue specifically.
In a different domain, can you imagine the number of masters, PhDs, postdocs, etc that aim to cure cancer? How many of those do you think achieve that goal? Some parts of AI have become an experimental science, and should be judged by those standards.
My very limited experience with machine learning is that a lot of it does consist of trial and error and guesswork, and the ways to work out why something works or doesn't work are quite limited, and generally you have to just keep trying things until it does work.
onda activate SimEx
@MarcGlisse Umm... not so much. If any of those aim to cure cancer they are immediately informed that it is not a realistic or feasible goal. I assume that the goal in the OP's project is somewhat more tractable than that. If you're coming from CS, the OP's project likely isn't prove P = NP or something quite so pie in the sky. I don't mean that it necessarily can be done, but it likely isn't something that is so obviously unlikely to be doable in a short project.
How do other known approaches perform? There isn't only one other known approach, right? Their current approach is likely the best that a full-time paid professional could come up with, so I don't think you should be disappointed by failing to do better. It may not be an appropriate goal for a thesis to beat such an arbitrary benchmark. Maybe doing a survey of existing methods (other than the company's) first will 1) give some concrete data to use in the thesis and 2) inspire a better approach than the currently failing one. Start simple, how good is least squares on this problem?
Negative results are still results and should be published. Some fields have dedicated conference tracks for those.
As I wrote in this old answer, "it didn't work" is not the end -- the end is knowing why it didn't work.
The caveat with AI/ML is that things are moving so quickly that "nobody got time for" clever ideas that didn't work. In other fields, a negative result might still lead to a strong publication, but this is not the case in AI/ML. Even things that do work but don't outperform the state-of-the-art are unlikely to get much attention. This is the nature of the game, and it is something to accept if you move forward in this field.
After all, how can I be sure that I tried everything or that I correctly implemented those ideas?
This is the main thing I would focus on. A general rule of thumb in research (at least, in fields where something is being created or calculated) is to do many "sanity checks" before running the complicated, conclusive experiment or calculation.
In computer-related research, a mistake that I often see novices making is that they write hundreds or thousands of lines of code and then turn it on (often running it for several days!) and expect it to work. I always suggest the opposite: start with the simplest possible thing (e.g., 16x16 thumbnail images) and verify that that works as expected. Keep simplifying until it does the right thing (and ideally, until it runs very quickly, allowing you to run experiments in near-real time). Then you can slowly add back the complexity. In this way, you can ensure things are implemented correctly, and if it ends up not working, you'll have some intuition for why the original idea didn't work in practice.
Finally, a subject-specific comment: if you are using GANs to make synthetic data, you should know that GANs are highly finicky (e.g., to the hyperparameters). You may need to run many experiments before you find the magic numbers that achieve the desired performance. This will require many GPU-hours -- all the more reason to run many "sanity checks" before unleashing all your experiments.
‘ A general rule of thumb in research is to do many "sanity checks" ’ – that's a general rule of thumb in basically any discipline that creates something. Engineering, programming, politics, even music. Unfortunately, quite a lot of research is actually doing a rather bad job at it.
"the end is knowing why it didn't work." Unfortunately, this is seldom possible in the area of deep learning. As the OP wrote: "After months of working on this model, it still seems to me a complete black box.", which is understandable, since these neural nets consist of millions or even billions of parameters. Nevertheless, there do exist tools that allow you to "peek" inside a network, such as Cockpit.
@mhdadk - not sure I agree. Yes, DL is famous for its black-box problem, but it's still possible to gain intuition by looking at which experiments gave good results and which experiments didn't.
@leftaroundabout - good point, updated. I imagine sanity checks are useful to many "theoretical" STEM fields as well (even if only a calculation / theory is being created), but maybe not in research outside of STEM.
@cag51 But if they're all giving bad results? You may not have a lot of differentiating data in such a case.
Maybe. In my experience, I can usually suggest some simple tests that either uncover the problem (usually a bug or misunderstanding) or give some insight into why the idea didn't work out as we expected. But AI is a big place, it's possible there are some settings where you can't really do this.
"I always suggest the opposite: start with the simplest possible thing (e.g., 16x16 thumbnail images) and verify that that works as expected." This was my intuition, to train on a tiny subset of the data, to see how my model performs at that level. For some reason my thesis advisor instructed me not to do it. Eventually I spent months training for nothing. Now I'm stuck and in need to simplify my training as I wanted to do in the first place...
Yeah, the exact details of how you identify a relevant simple problem will vary widely. But at some level, you want to start with something that should definitely work, verify that it works, and then incrementally make changes and test them. Sometimes you might be doing something so novel that this is impossible, but in that case (1) it'll take an order of magnitude longer, and (2) you'll spend most of that extra time doing very tedious debugging, some of which might require some serious software skills that not all students have.
It's no surprise that many promising ideas don't work out. Indeed
Maybe this idea is simply not doable for the current task.
For a related story in mathematics, see What to do when you spend several months working on an idea that fails in a masters thesis?
"Machine learning" is a trending topic. Lots of smart people are thinking about it, and lots of students are signing up. There will be many deadend trails in the search for the few that really lead somewhere useful. Only you can decide whether you can tolerate the frustration natural in that search.
I agree with everything in cag51's answer. But I wanted to add that your own assessment may in fact be correct; "But now I feel that I can't cope with this level of anxiety and frustration." You are right, a PhD will likely be 4 more years of this. You might not enjoy that very much.
That's ok, you will be more than qualified to begin a myriad of PhD's in neighbouring fields. You are actually at a great stage to be having this realisation. Off the top of my head computational biology often gets people coming in from more computational fields to transfer knowledge. Biology degrees don't always include much background in either computational modelling or big data, so there is real demand for interdisciplinary talent. Also, I suppose it should be mentioned that you could always go into industry for a year, earn a much stronger salary, then come back to this decision. That is not an uncommon route.
If you do decide that on balance this is still the thing for you, then I agree with the advice in cag51's answer. You can make this work, it just might mean a slightly different strategy. And lots and lots of persistence.
On the other hand, I did a masters in physics theory. I did well in the masters, and got good PhD offers in theory, which was tempting. But in truth, doing research in theory was spoiling my enjoyment of physics. So I went and found a computational PhD and loved it. Now is the moment to work out what you want your next 4 years to be, because you are at a very unusual point in life when you are almost guaranteed to get what you chose.
It's all fine and well until
I can't help but feel that a failure of this project is a failure of me as a professional
Indeed, the subtle art of being in academia is digging golden nuggets of knowledge from otherwise "failing" (well, most of the time, anyway) projects. Most of the time, if the spec is detailed enough - e.g. "achieve X with Y precision on Z dataset by time T", it is met by the virtue of the "unknown" portion of the work being already done. That is, no one claims to finish a completely novel and creative work in a given timeframe. New ideas usually don't work and often many man-months are "wasted" on them... That is, until you realize the value there is the knowledge obtained in the process.
The issue is not specific to ML/AI, what changes is you don't have your expectations as high in many other fields; the level of hype around ML has research tied much closely to real world applications where people expect workable results, something that may take decades in more "traditional" fields.
Re: "if the spec is any detailed, meeting it is a largely retroactive effort": too many typos for me to guess what you mean here. s/as value/has value/.
Sorry, re-read it again and failed to spot typos. Probably rather poor wording instead.
(Acknowledge X as Y seems to be a legitimate usage, too - in this case, X=knowledge Y=value).
Sentence in question meant just retrofitting the spec to already obtained results to a large extent as opposed to coming up with novel results matching the desired spec.
I see what you mean re. X as Y. But then Y is an adjective, such as 'valuable'. Yes, I was struggling over the wording.
@Lodinn "is any detailed" doesn't make sense, or at least it's not idiomatic English. Also "knowledge as value" - more natural to say "valuable"
@Matthew Not necessarily, at least, Cambridge gives an example of "Historians generally acknowledge her as a genius in her field". As a non-native speaker though, I appreciate your input and have amended (or at least attempted to) the answer.
Thank you as well @BlokeDownThePub. I don't get why you can say "is it any good?" but not "is it any detailed?", but at any rate, I'd better take it over to the relevant se or ask around instead :)
Yay. It’s improving!
Try these steps:
Go back to your basic assumptions (what modifications may yield improvement) and test them out one by one, not together.
Start with small modifications of the original state-of-the-art training process and only increase the amount (or amplitude, or sample size) of customizations gradually to see when the results start to deteriorate rather than improve.
Remember that when generating fully synthetic data, it may be difficult to obtain the same statistical properties as in real data - this is a common problem of data generation, and it may seriously harm the trained model performance (as measured on real data, of course). That's why it may be better to do augmentation instead: start from a real sample and disturb it in different ways, rather than create samples synthetically from scratch. With this approach, some of your ideas may still apply, and you will have a much bigger chance of actually improving the accuracy, because you can easily fine-tune how much of the perturbation is applied, going gradually from 0% to 100% and observing changes in the performance along the way.
Don't train on synthetic data alone, but combine a (larger) sample of synthetic data with a (smaller) sample of real data, to let the model observe and learn the less obvious real-world characteristics, ones that you didn't manage to replicate in a synthetic generation process. Optionally, you can also put a larger training weight on real samples to compensate for a smaller relative size of this subset.
Make sure that your evaluation setup is correct and that you're measuring what you really want to measure.
Last but not least, keep in mind that "research" is all about trying many different ideas and seeing most of them fail, just to spot one that actually works. This is particularly relevant for Deep Learning, where the complexity of algorithms is very large and still growing with new advances in the field. Sometimes, the best thing you can do is accept that your idea doesn't work and proceed to the next one. :D
This may not be the answer you (or other people) might want to hear, but I think the real reason is that the performance of an AI mostly depends on primarily the intelligence behind its design and secondly the resources given to it. For deep learning algorithms, this intelligence factor includes the intelligence behind the deep learning algorithm as well as the intelligence behind the heuristics used in encoding the input data in a way that the deep learning algorithms can perform well on that data.
If the previous solutions used by the company had a lot of intelligence behind them, likely due to being designed by intelligent people who imbued some of their intelligence into heuristics on which those solutions are based, they would be able to easily outperform any unintelligent application of deep learning to the problem.
There is no cheat for this; you cannot get artificial intelligence greater than what went into its design (after controlling for resources). So do not be afraid to try to invent your own heuristics based on your own intelligence and your current experience with the problem! Deep learning can be used to fine-tune your heuristics, or help you search for heuristics. Or you may use heuristics to adapt existing deep learning algorithms to your problem. Whatever it is, do not assume that deep learning can somehow create intelligence out from nothing.
The point is, there is something very wrong if every change you make seems to have no effect on performance. It strongly suggests that the deep learning algorithm is so swamped with noise that it is producing some kind of uniformly random results. And this situation is impossible if you were using heuristics, because using your own intelligence you can work through examples of bad performance and tweak the heuristics to make improvements!
In this field not many improvements are achieved with large changes. Often times, the current state of the art is very good. But that does not mean there is no room for improvement. Sometimes, these systems are not well optimized. Or in some cases there are a group of special cases that are more prone to failure. You may attack the problem from these angles.
For instance, if you believe the system is not well optimized, you may try to find more optimal parameters. Start with the current system and slowly add/remove more features, adjust parameters of the current system. Change one aspect at a time to see if any of these make any difference. The difference does not need to be large; smaller improvements can lead to more smaller improvements and at the end of the day you might end up with a significantly better optimized system.
For the second case, you must make carefully controlled experiments to find cases where failure is very common. Try to identify why they fail and integrate alternative detection methods to these cases. You might segment the feature space and if a sample falls into that space, you can use a different set of feature extraction or a classifier system to identify those samples.
Also do not constrain yourself to deep learning approaches only. Machine learning is a vast field with many methods. Try other classifiers or combine deep learning with classical techniques. Analyzing the distribution of the data can open up interesting insights. Do not shy away from formulating data distribution to solve for optimum classifier for the case. DL approaches are quite easy to set up to work well, but often times they fall behind to carefully curated classification systems. Many practitioners in this field think that it is a silver bullet to all problems, but that is not the case.
The idea of a Masters degree in AI is a pretty large reach for a university to award. Most AI is pretty piecemeal and working on magic.
The truth is, despite marketing hype like Hadoop and such, there is no general solution to unstructured data except a full-blown AI solution to correlate data with experiences in the world. Visual processing gives you structure along three dimensions (two spatial). But, much like Edwin Abbott Abbott's Flatland, missing a dimension can force very large errors out of your decision-making process.
You can try to do your learning with more than these dimensions (adding another camera at an orthogonal angle, for example) -- that's one answer. Or, you can implement a full-blown AI model which is ready to be developed in the world and uses a multi-layered, Markov model, for tracking all probabilities on all inputs to create excellent guesses, assuming your input data is ordered (and not noise).
Sorry to be blunt, but I am afraid your question has to nothing to do with machine learning or deep learning - or even computers at all for that matter.
Once you see that what is happening to you is what happens to anybody designing/performing/interpreting experiments, you'll be halfway through figuring out what is not working as expected, and how to make it work. Most importantly, you will understand if this is what you want for your career. In fact:
Before this I was sure that being a AI researcher was the career that
I wanted to follow. But now I feel that I can't cope with this level
of anxiety and frustration. If it is like this for a MSc project, I
wonder how it would be for a PhD.
Doing research is about hitting your head 90% of the time on things that do not work, and patting yourself the 10% of the time it actually works. "Hitting your head" typically means everything from questioning the underlying hypothesis being tested, to the assumptions of the test, to the experiment design, the data taking etc.etc.etc. The ability you need to grow is the methodology to systematically attack all those elemnts separately, and temper the frustration when you don't see the light at the end of the tunnel yet.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.501765 | 2021-09-05T15:14:59 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/175209",
"authors": [
"A rural reader",
"Bloke Down The Pub",
"Criticize SE actions means ban",
"FourierFlux",
"Lodinn",
"Marc Glisse",
"Miguel",
"Moon",
"Neinstein",
"Simon Richter",
"WHO'sNoToOldRx4Covid-CENSORED",
"ZeroTheHero",
"astronat supports the strike",
"cag51",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/102659",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110698",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117053",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13044",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/136702",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/145124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14695",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21226",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23576",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42749",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49043",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69504",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70594",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71042",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/90441",
"leftaroundabout",
"mhdadk",
"rg_software",
"ttbek"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
201439 | How to answer 'Is your research going to be in biology text books one day?' question during faculty interview?
I am in the field of neuroscience/immunology, and I am applying for an academic group leader position. During most of my interviews so far I've been asked general questions about my fit into the department, funding acquisition, collaborations, how I would distinguish myself from my competitors, etc. Once, a person asked me the following question:
Is your research going to be in biology text books one day?
This is obviously a provocative question because none can tell upfront if their research will have such a strong impact on the scientific community; and speaking frankly, anyone making such a bold claim cannot be taken seriously. Of course you need to show that you feel confident with your topic and your research plan is promising and innovative. How did you answer weird questions like the one above during your faculty interviews?
I am a immunologist, not a futurologist, Jim!
As a sidenote, a variation of this question I have received in the past is "Can you see yourself have a Wikipedia entry eventually? What would it say?". Answering these questions pedantically that you can't predict the future ... also communicates something to the hiring committee, but it's probably not the message you want to send.
If you plan on writing a textbook and making students use it for your class, then why not? I had a calculus teacher who did this...
@user4574 A book requires much more (time and work), than a couple of papers. As an example, the 416 pages of Modern Fortran by Milan Curcic is a work of 3 years, briefly described in Writing a technical book with Manning in 2020. The free excerpt Exploring Modern Fortran Basics and a tutorial video are very welcome, yet were not anticipated.
"Chances are -- if I get this job!"
Becoming the leading textbook example of unethical biology experiments is probably not what they are asking about, I presume?
The question is clearly not please accurately predict whether your research will be mentioned in standard graduate texts for biology students in the year 2050.
Rather, the question is presumably I am giving you an opportunity to explain how your research relates to topics of fundamental importance that can be appreciated by everyone in the field.
You can give an anodyne answer to the effect that nobody can predict the future and blah blah, but I imagine that the impression that this might create in the person asking this question is that your research, while valuable, is of a more specialized nature and its importance is limited to a particular subfield.
An anodyne answer is precisely not what OP should give. They can be assertive about the work they do and they should be, even if they can not vouch for textbook-level achievements.
To expand on this: an honest but substantive answer can draw a line from your own work to something textbook-level: “Realistically, my own current work on mutation rates in roadrunner feather mites is too specialised to directly appear in any textbook. But we hope it will help to resolve current uncertainties about roadrunners’ placement in the cuckoo family, and perhaps give new insights for parasite-based taxonomic methods more broadly. So it contributes to refining our overall taxonomic classification of birds and other vertebrates, as presented in textbooks now and in the future.”
These questions aren't only about the value of OP's subfield, they are also about ambition - answering "well, I don't think my research really goes to the level of standard textbooks" may sound a lot like OP doesn't really have ambitions beyond making reasonable contributions to their current sub-niche-in-a-niche. Which might well be true, but it's frequently not what a hiring committee wants to hear.
It's 2023, all of the low-hanging fruit has been picked. Pretty much everyone's work is limited to a particular subfield
@ScottishTapWater All the obvious low-hanging fruit has been picked. It is - retrospectively - quite surprising that much low-hanging fruit is seen only today. Some becomes only accessible with the right tools, but then is easy to pick, once identified.
@CaptainEmacs - To a point, but you have to admit that paradigm-changing research is less and less common due very much to the fact that our existing theories are getting closer and closer to describing base reality. By low-hanging-fruit I didn't mean it in the traditional easy sense, more things that have huge scope just by virtue of being fundamental to a field since the field was new
@ScottishTapWater That's what I used to think. But even without changes in the understanding of, say, fundamental laws of physics, there are things that really open up new fields of research and surprisingly so. I have seen some. And even in physics, new holes increasingly appear. I remind of Kelvin's “only two small clouds” [remaining] on the horizon of knowledge in physics. Keep your eyes peeled. Of course, not even the most brilliant scientist can hope for that. But every good scientist should be ready for that.
Maybe I'm not conveying my point well enough... I'm not trying to say physics is complete and we're done. Clearly there are huge holes in it that are going to need to be fixed (just look at gravity/qft). It's more the ratio of active researchers to big unsolved problems is quite small. The exception, as you've said, is new fields of research. However, even most "new fields" are really just subniches of what would have previously been considered already niche fields. That being said... I think I was just being grumpy and pessimistic yesterday even if I do somewhat believe the sentiment of it
On a similar tack I once read - possibly written by Hamming himself IIRC - that Hamming used to ask candidates: "What's the most important open question in your field?" - followed by: "Why aren't you working on that?" I believe that wasn't to tell the candidate he was lightweight by not tackling the most important question in his field but instead to give him an opportunity to explain why his interest was important and worth working on.
This question is similar to "where do you see yourself in five years?". It's an invitation to explain what is important to you. They are asking about your personal values and ambition. You state "Of course you need to show that you feel confident with your topic and your research plan is promising and innovative." but I don't think there are many wrong answers, as long as you are sincere.
Maybe you value making science aproachable; in that case, you could talk about how high-school biology text books are too convoluted and how you would use tiktok to teach biology to kids.
Maybe you want to do niche, theoretical research; in that case you could joke that you would pitty the poor post-grad student if they had to study your papers. Explain that you hope your real contribution will be elsewhere (medicine for example).
If you are engaged in risky experimental research, you might answer truthfully: "I hope so, but I knew I took a big risk when I started this line of research." The interviewer should appreciate your capability to critically self-reflect.
In short, this is a great question to get to know you as a person, as long as you are willing to open yourself up.
I like this answer (+1). "where do you see yourself in 5/15 years", even though I word it differently, allows me to let a candidate (Industry, not Academia) talk about their mid and long term goals. I specifically highlight the fact that this is not a tricky question (none are, which I also clearly state) and allows me to see my replacement ("your position"), or anything but my replacement ("whatever happens, not your position") or something in between ("manager") or something outside the typical path ("research in X"). If the candidate trusts you it is a wonderful way to get to know them.
(cont'd) I had cases where the answer was "your position" (not that blunt of course) and all but two changed their mind when faced with the position (I was giving them opportunities to see how it is). The ones who stayed are now CTOs of large companies. The absolutely key point, however, is to make sure they know this is not the idiotic "what are your weaknesses" kind of question which mostly shows that the interviewer is really, really junior (or that the company has a fucked up hiring process)
"where do you see yourself in 5/15 years?" -- "In your seat."
"Where do you see yourself in 5 years" is a very common question during the interviews. I've heard of a guy interviewed for a postdoc position in our institute who replied: "I see myself as a full professor and winning the nobel prize"... he didn't get hired.
"I will work toward the end that it might, hoping that it does, but expecting that it probably won't. Prediction is hard, especially about the future."
What more can you say? But laugh when you say it.
Such questions require speculative answers. Be positive.
«One can certainly plan research, but not the results!» Seebach, D. Organic Synthesis—Where Now? Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1990, 29, 1320–1367. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.199013201 (the author's copy) right on the first page.
Say something like: I have discovered what the co-receptor CD8 actually does in regulating the antigen-recognition pattern of the TCR; and this will undoubtedly enter the textbooks, but probably not under my name.
This is the type of question that can be used to test your type of personality and your abilities to frame your research in a larger picture.
Are you a specialist, or a generalist?
Do you think in the details, or do you think big?
Basically, Can you think of hypothetical outcomes that create a path of how your specific research might influence general textbook topics in the field? You are asked to speculate here, so do it as good as you can. Just don't overdo it and make sure you show your sense of reality, by framing it as a speculative possibility.
The right strategy is also case dependent. In general, when you apply not all chefs like generalists and people that think big, some times they just want a worker for the dirty details, a PhD/Postdoc who does exactly what they say without having too much initiative and ambitions. But sometimes they do want independent researchers who are able to write their own Funding proposals, and who can frame realistic research in a way such that it sounds important enough to get funding.
Probably it's best to be yourself, give your natural answer, but keep the context and interest of the other party in mind.
Answer: I don't know about textbooks, but I'm convinced that in 100 years' time, my research will feature in the high-school curriculum in whatever medium they'll be using at that time.
Background: When I was learning German at the end of the previous millennium, I was given some old German books from the 1930s and they happened to be university-level Chemistry text books and they contained Secondary-level education Chemistry by that time, and that was just 60 years, so yeah!
Note: My grandmother who gave me those books had no idea about the value nor their content; she only knew that they were German.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.503667 | 2023-09-03T23:24:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/201439",
"authors": [
"Buttonwood",
"Captain Emacs",
"Jon Custer",
"PLL",
"Peter - Reinstate Monica",
"ScottishTapWater",
"Simone Brioschi",
"WoJ",
"davidbak",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10094",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11909",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1277",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/130058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15446",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15477",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/173385",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30987",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51948",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72211",
"user4574",
"xLeitix"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
203868 | Contacting Academic about Industry Problem
I am on an R&D team in industry with no formal connection to anyone in academia. However, a professor wrote a paper on implementing idea A. I have an idea B that extends idea A, but I am unsure about some practical implementation details. I strongly suspect that the aforementioned professor would have some intuition about implementing idea B as they did a very good job of implementing idea A. Moreover, the paper containing idea A did not get very much attention (i.e. has a low citation count and no follow up that I can see). It seems to me that if I am right about idea B, then they might enjoy having found this new application area.
I have written up an explainer on this idea which has the rough form of an academic paper -- though in its current form it would not be publishable. I would like to email this professor, give a brief explanation, attach the explainer, and ask -- if they have the time to spare -- that they look it over and comment if it catches their interest. Is this an acceptable thing to do? If not, are there alternatives and, if so, are there faux pas that I should specifically avoid?
If this falls in your company's revenue stream, offering the academic a small consulting arrangement would enable making sure all the IP gets addressed, and will float your needs higher in the priority list.
What exactly is your goal?
Acceptable practices likely depend on the country. Furthermore, some countries have public-private partnership programs which could be of interest.
Sure! I (an academic) had someone in industry contact me in a somewhat similar circumstance. I always had the right to politely decline to engage; as it turns out, we had a pleasant email exchange followed by me visiting their workplace for an afternoon (which was quite interesting to me even aside from the mathematics), giving a talk, getting two free meals, and having some interesting and interested discussions with people I never would have otherwise met.
@user2705196 My main goal is to get advise on implementation. But other valuable outcomes could be anything from a collaboration to the academic in question pointing out some substantive flaw in my work. I think the extension is straightforward, but it's hard to know how good the idea really is without a more robust implementation.
This is quite acceptable. I suggest a preliminary email saying that their paper touches on (is close to) some work you are doing in your company and you have an idea that might interest them. Perhaps a brief sketch of the idea, sufficient to show them you're not a crank. Don't include the (draft) paper. You could offer to send it if they are interested.
If this should progress to joint work you will need to be careful about the IP. The professor will want to publish results, the company may want to get something for nothing.
On the whole this kind of collaboration is good for both parties.
The OP could also provide a link to the draft, which would allow the professor to read it or not at their convenience.
Agree 100% with Ethan's answer, but let me phrase it slightly differently.
ask -- if they have the time to spare -- that they look it over and comment
Professors never have time to spare and have little interest in unsolicited manuscripts. I won't go so far as to say that you definitely won't get a response, but it's probably 50-50, and it'll almost certainly be a brief reply rather than an in-depth review of your paper.
Is this an acceptable thing to do?
Yes, it is, just approach it slightly differently. I would send a brief e-mail in which you ask the technical question you want to ask (i.e., "I am wondering how you implemented A; in my work implementing B, it seems there are several options....").
This has the advantage that it's a light lift for the professor, so they are likely to respond and give you something helpful. And if they express interest in B, then your manuscript will no longer be unsolicited when you send it (though I would still consider sending a one-page summary with your most exciting results, rather than a full manuscript). The usual cautions about protecting your IP apply.
I understand why you both want to avoid sending the manuscript. I would just like to mention that not sending the manuscript, i.e. adding at least one round, can be an obstacle. A not unlikely scenario: I read the question, need more details, don't find any attached manuscript where those details would likely be, don't want to engage at this point, forget about the email, the end.
The problem with "unsolicited manuscripts" isn't that they are unsolicited, but often written by cranks or clueless amateurs and have no value to this professor. Someone doing serious work on a problem who has read the previous paper and tried to expand on it, that's a totally different matter.
Both valid points, but I think an initial e-mail with a manuscript is more likely to be overlooked. Either because it will be misclassified as crankery or spam, or because the recipient will say "oh! this is interesting! I'll come back to it when I have some time"....which never happens.
are there faux pas that I should specifically avoid
There is a potential one. Have you discussed this with your company's legal department? You have just generated Intellectual Property which the company may want to use in some way (either to generate revenue, or as patent ammunition). Your legal people may not want you to share that with an external party, or at least not without an NDA and/or an arrangement in place between your company and the university which spells out in detail how any further IP resulting from this contact would be split up.
Note that while contacting legal may protect your employer in the long term, in the short term it can only put a damper on your plans, so you should think carefully whether you want to wake up these particular sleeping dogs. However, simply sending this out without covering your behind first may get you into hot waters internally, depending on your company's culture.
Of course, if you have to write in your email to that professor with "before I can share that paper, you will have to sign this NDA", that will drastically reduce the professor's willingness to collaborate with you.
Thank you for this observation, but I'm covered on the legal side.
As others have said, this sort of thing goes much easier if you can provide a consulting arrangement, which will both reimburse the professor for their time as well as set out the legal boundaries regarding IP and publication.
There are also dedicated programs that are there to explicitly fund this kind of academic-industry collaboration. One such is the Small Business Innovation Research program . For this particular program, you write up a proposal to the Department of Energy, who then releases funds to your company for the R&D, some of which ought to be a subcontract to the professor. It's certainly more work than just cutting a check, but it may also be easier to get your company behind you if someone else is paying for it. In my experience the award rate is fairly high for this particular program.
Both are valid approaches, but very different. One way, you're hiring the academic as a free agent, in a fairly lightweight agreement. The SBIR would be a sponsored project, and the contract (or one of them, anyway) is with the University, and involves writing a solid grant. Each has it's place.
@ScottSeidman that's a good point. I suspect most universities will want to have some input in consulting gigs, but much less than a full grant
Some lay out a maximum amount of time faculty spend consulting. Mine does that, and is very liberal about it, but does suggest we run our contracts through their counsel, without giving them any right of refusal at all.
Things get more complex with International Contracts, though. Some new laws absolutely need to get followed.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.504599 | 2023-11-13T22:00:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/203868",
"authors": [
"Greg Martin",
"Marc Glisse",
"Scott Seidman",
"Skippy le Grand Gourou",
"TJM",
"cag51",
"gnasher729",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11523",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/11873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/134261",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/157895",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20457",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21226",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39510",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62470",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"terdon",
"thegreatemu",
"user2705196"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
118576 | Is it fair to use techniques I found on the web to solve my assignment?
I'd want to get perspective on what I feel is an unjustified case of academic misconduct.
I am taking a mathematics subject and part of my assignment was to submit answers to questions given.
One of the questions I was unsure of what method I should apply, I searched on youtube and found tutorials on how to solve this problem. I should make it explicit the direct answer was not part of the video, however, using the same method I could substitute my values and get the correct answer.
I may be accused of plagiarism and apparently, my use of the video was unfair and plagiarism. I suspect it's because I used the same symbols which in retrospect I could have, should have changed however I still feel this is unjustified and comparable to applying the chain rule or any other mathematical principle taught through the increasingly powerful use of the internet.
Do you think there are ground to challenge this? I thought I was doing my due diligence sourcing methods, not direct answers.
Do you think this fair?
Welcome to Academia.SE. Whether we think this is fair seems less important. What policies for the course were in place? At my undergraduate institution, what you did would have been find as long as we cited the YouTube video and how it helped us. Could you clarify whether or not there were course policies at play here? Was this a take-home test or homework?
Is there such a thing as justified academic misconduct? ;-)
Have you actually been accused of academic misconduct, or are you talking about hypotheticals here?
As the title changes it sounds more and more like you have been accused of breaking rules. If that is the case, then what is the rule you were accused of breaking and was it explicit?
@Flyto Maybe, suppose you are taking a medical course and during the exam which includes a question on how to respond to a certain medical emergency that emergency actually happens to the person next to you and your mind blanking you quickly use forbidden materials in your backpack (Google, a textbook etc.) to look up what to do and save a life.
Doing research, whether on-line or from books, is one thing. Trusting a YouTube video is something else entirely.
@jamesqf Why? There are thousands of high quality videos that provide instruction on all sorts of topics. I wouldn't blindly trust a YouTube video any more than I'd blindly trust a website, but there are a lot of useful videos that demonstrate math techniques (say, finding eigenvalues) that come from anybody from major universities to organizations like Khan Academy to individual professors making their own videos to random people.
Sometimes this is even a good solution to a assignment. I once had a assignment to find any good approximation to compute a formula in a faster way. Students found many different approximations, but any approximation which worked good enough was a valid solution. Another time I was surprised when the professor later announced that finding some parameter by a brute-force search (for a smaller problem) is a good solution. Now I know, that you later often will use "anything that works". In the end, knowing where and how to look for a solution is one of the things you should learn at university.
@jamesqf Lawrence Lessig is a professor and copyright scholar. He makes YouTube videos on copyright that I thoroughly trust. There are many books discussing copyright by journalists and other non-specialists that contain glaring errors. Remember that the platform or media is not the same as the source.
A possible assignment could be "Find $\lim_{x\to0}\frac{\sin x}x$". Some Youtube video will show how to solve this with l'Hôpital as $\frac{\cos 0}1=1$. However, in your actual course, this exercise was perhaps intended to find out that $\sin'=\cos$ in the first place ... in that case you have introduced circularity.
@Flyto Presumably, the OP meant something along the lines of "unjustified accusation of academic misconduct".
Presumably you referenced the video in your answer. In which case, it's not plagiarism.
A great piece of advice of one of my profesors: Feel free to search online or in books for methods to solve the problem, but after you read something, close the book, and wait an hour or two before solving it.
@TimothyAWiseman: Why in the world would he, or anyone serious, waste time making videos when the information could be conveyed better, faster, and cheaper in writing?
Whatever it was, it wasn't plagiarism. Whether it was within the rules set by your professor is another question. But, assuming that the rules permitted online research to answer the question, then that is all you did. You will have to judge conformance to the rules of your course.
If someone has accused you of plagiarism they are probably using the word incorrectly. That doesn't mean, of course, that you aren't without fault. That is for you and others to judge.
Using the same symbols in mathematics can hardly be faulted in any case, as many of them are standardized and used in the same way throughout mathematics. They might, however, have been a tip-off that you went outside the allowed bounds.
But, for your own educational progress, I hope you don't go to the web too soon to get such questions answered. Struggling with a problem expands your mind in a way very different from finding a solution or a solution framework. If you want to be a mathematician, you need to develop that skill.
Note that exercises given in almost every course, aren't given for the purpose of finding an answer. The professor already has the answer. The purpose is to help you grow your mental abilities. Work on the hard problems. If you want to learn more, work on harder problems.
It is unclear whether the OP went "to the web too soon." It seems like they studied a method to solve the problem on the web.
@user2768, I didn't make a claim that they did. I recommend that students don't.
I did not jump on the web immediately to attempt to solve the problem. I did reflect on my lecture content, looked at my tutorial discussions and did try to formulate steps to the final answer. In the end I used the internet as an outlet to try and understand how a problem like this can be solved but I do admit I didn't linger on this question for hours wondering, thinking. Perhaps I moved on too quickly, I still don't think this justifies this punishment.
@Buffy Your phrasing includes "your [educational progress]" and "[I hope] you" which is somewhat suggestive of fault on the OP's part, a minor edit should clarify
This started out as an answer and ended with a tangential lecture
Regarding the struggle on your own part: We are in 2018. After confirming that you don't know the right method, the first step SHOULD be to check the web. Of course, one should be critical of web sources, but that is beside the point - society today is moving towards "cloud knowledge". While I also encourage self study, using "the cloud" (wisely) is the most efficient way to solve problems...
@StianYttervik In the short term perhaps but Buffy's right to point out that this trend is also producing reams of would-be scientists and mathematicians with no critical thinking skills of their own. Cloud knowledge doesn't mean "everyone's knowledge except my own", and a mathematics course is almost certainly expecting the student to apply some of their own thinking rather than just look up the answer someplace else. Admittedly this is a very difficult and blurry line in general - after all, research ability is also important (OP did this part well) and arguably more useful day-to-day.
...I was unsure of what method I should apply, I searched on youtube and found tutorials on how to solve this problem...using the same method I could substitute my values and get the correct answer.
That is not plagiarism, that is learning: You were given a problem, you found a method that could be used to solve your problem, and you applied the method to your problem. That's exactly how we learn.
By analogy, suppose I'm asked to find the area of a circle, but I don't know how. So, I search the internet and discover that the area of a circle is π·r2. Now I'm able to apply what I've learnt to solve the problem (assuming I know the radius r or diameter 2·r). That's how we learn, that's not plagiarism.
Also, basic techniques like these don't normally need to be cited. If you use some obscure, advanced theorem that came out last year, then you should cite that, even in homework. For some techniques, it helps to name the rule (e.g. step 5: use L'Hopital's rule [work]), but you wouldn't need a formal bibliographic citation.
I agree with all of this, but it is worth noting that many courses, especially in mathematics and related fields, discourage use of materials from outside the course because they want the students to learn the methods as presented. This especially makes sense in an area like PDE. Many homework problems have trivial solutions if any technique is allowed but the professor wants to force you to use techniques that are more difficult to learn that technique.
Rote learning an equation without understanding it (or how to derive it) is arguably the most basic form of learning, if at all. That said, it’s probably the norm so it’s hardly unethical and definitely not misconduct.
@TimothyAWiseman "many courses...discourage use of materials from outside the course," wow! That surprises me. A significant amount of what I've learnt was outside of my courses
@user2768 Agreed, I remember specifically being told "if you learn only what's displayed here, you will get a C - higher grades require learning outside of the course materials"
@user2768 It often makes sense in context. Professors often want to use relatively simple problems to teach advanced techniques rather than constructing complex problems that can only be solved with the advanced technique. The simple problems often have trivial solutions if the techniques available aren't limited. This comes up a lot with partial differential equations for example.
@TimothyAWiseman Understood, that makes sense.
Seems to me the professor was expecting the students to come up with their own method, not use someone else's. Whether that's sensible or not is by the by, although whether the professor should have made this clearer is more pertinent, particularly if sanctions are now threatened as a result.
@LightnessRacesinOrbit I didn't get that from the OP's question, but your point is valid
@user2768 I deduced it from (a) the plagiarism accusation, and (b) the purpose of schools
I concur with @user2768 's answer. What you did was fine, unless the assignment specified "don't look anything up".
I think what you should have done was include in your submission exactly what you told us here:
I was unsure of what method I should apply, I searched on youtube and
found tutorials on how to solve this problem.
with a reference to the link that helped you.
Had you done so the worst case would be an accusation that you misinterpreted the rules (which may not have been clearly stated), not that you cheated in any way.
This is what I provide my students for guidance: https://www.cs.umb.edu/~eb/honesty/
@St.Inkbug University policies were OK as far as they went, but they focused on the "don'ts". I wanted to use the opportunity to encourage exploring. I usually asked students to summarize this piece in the first assignment, so I could later remind them that they'd read it. Sadly, many paraphrased the don'ts and skipped the dos.
@St.Inkbug Thank you. If you want to continue the conversation offline you can find my email address in my profile and on my web page.
I suspect it's because I used the same symbols which in retrospect I could have, should have changed
This may well be the case. And I can understand the attitude behind it.
It is one thing to find an alternative source to teach you what you need, learn from it and apply what you've learned to a given task. This is perfectly fine (most of the time).
However, looking up the solution to your task, copying it, only putting in different numbers, and handing that in as your own work will look much more inacceptable.
No, you should not have just changed the symbols! That can be seen as an attempt to cover your 'plagiarism'.
What you should do in the future is:
If you find (part of) a solution to your task in some literature, pick it up and understand it. (That's not to memorize it!)
Then put aside that literature and with your acquired understanding solve the task manually. This will help you avoid the accusations of plagiarism (no guarantee, depending on how much the source's solution differs from what you're expected to provide) and at the same time help you learn the required/requested skills and prove that you've done so.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.505405 | 2018-10-17T13:46:50 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/118576",
"authors": [
"Acccumulation",
"Bilkokuya",
"Bryan Krause",
"Buffy",
"Clay07g",
"Ethan Bolker",
"Flyto",
"Goofer",
"Hagen von Eitzen",
"Konrad Rudolph",
"Lightness Races in Orbit",
"Michael",
"Robert Columbia",
"SecretAgentMan",
"Stian",
"Strawberry",
"TimothyAWiseman",
"Zach Lipton",
"allo",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12378",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20647",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21616",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27365",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/348",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43745",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45508",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/57981",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/58912",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/64110",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7018",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79727",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/80651",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8394",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84836",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85344",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/85932",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/94518",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/99374",
"jamesqf",
"technical_difficulty",
"user2768"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
118673 | How do some institutions attract so many female computer scientists?
It's no secret that computer science is a heavily male-dominated discipline. It's so male-dominated that some people have given up trying to attract more women. Yet Carnegie Mellon not only has close to 50% women in their undergraduate CS classes, they have lots of female faculty. Why?
I'm also interested in what any other institution that's been successful at achieving something resembling gender parity has done as well.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. Please note that further non-clarifying discussion may be deleted without notice.
It's a UK organisation, but the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) promotes the Athena SWAN charter for equality in higher education and their website includes some example of good practice: https://www.ecu.ac.uk/equality-charters/athena-swan/athena-swan-good-practice-in-heis/
It wasn't always the case that CS was a field dominated by men. Through the 1970's and into the 1980's, computer science was a field that attracted more women than many other STEM fields. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding
Carnegie Mellon gives an answer on their website:
The steady climb of women enrolling in these fields at Carnegie Mellon highlights a combination of factors: a strong commitment by leaders at the university, college and department levels; influential pipeline programs for middle- and high-school students; targeted recruitment; closer scrutiny of applications; support and mentorship programs; and attention to diversifying the faculty.
A second, speculative answer: Carnegie Mellon is wealthy. Computer science is where they invest the most. If they want to attract more women to their computer science department, they can use their money to do it. Many of the factors they list cost money. They may be decreasing the diversity of other universities.
If they are influencing middle school or earlier, they could equally be increasing the diversity at other universities with the same feed schools. (by supporting the 30% threshold past the age where biases tend to skew the balance)
@SeanHoulihane Their impacts could be wider, sure, but I doubt "equal": although I'm not familiar with Carnegie Mellon in particular, "pipeline" programs tend to be pretty strongly branded. Though they may do some general good for society, they are probably also reinforcing explicitly or implicitly "...and your next step is to come to Carnegie Mellon." I don't think it's a bad thing, I'm just skeptical you can estimate the broader impact by looking just at Carnegie.
@BryanKrause, I'm thinking if they improve the pipeline in a single school from an early enough age, that will tend to bootstrap the diversity within the school. Maybe not self-sustaining, but I think there is likely some amplification and it is not at all clear that 2nd choice universities would loose out.
Agreed, partly why I said I don't think it's a bad thing. I doubt anyone is really losing out, in any case, I don't think diversity is a zero sum game.
We are a smaller German University of Applied Science and most of our courses have a certain application field in addition to computer science (usually about 70% computer science, 30% application related). The application fields "media" and "medicine" seem to motivate many female students to start studying, even if they later decide to work in the automotive industry or somewhere else.
Furthermore, our university strongly invests in diversity actions, we are trying not to discriminate anyone, and we are trying to promote female students e.g. as student assistants / tutors (which is not hard, since we are usually looking for the best, and most times we are having more female top students than male ones). But for the younger female students it is good to see that others succeeded or are very successful.
Once you crossed the 30% mark, the feeling is that it's not "special" or "strange" if you are female.
One point where we have to improve is the number of female faculty members, but this takes time.
But still, motivating more students to study computer science is a high priority!
+1 for “Once you crossed the 30% mark, the feeling is that it's not "special" or "strange" if you are female.” —I suspect this is a huge factor. Theoretically, this is supported by work like Thomas Shelling’s “Micromotives and Macrobehavior”
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record:
I'm especially interested in answers from female computer scientists at CMU.
Well, go ask (some of) them, politely; you can't expect them to stumble onto this page...
The staff directory is available; you'll need to figure out which ones are women by the photos and the names though, and pick out a few people to contact. But, better yet, you should start by contacting the Dean or whatever CMU call the head of the School of Computer Science.
The School of Computer Science at CMU also has a dedicated Women @ SCS website, which you should check out, both for immediately-relevant material and for names of women faculty and management personnel which you could contact directly (i.e. put those at the top of your list of people to contact). Thanks to @user3067860 for noticing that site!
PS - As commenters suggest, you can't just start asking specific questions with long answers right away, you need to make sure whoever it is you contacted is willing to converse regarding these issues.
Maybe the OP should start here: http://www.women.cs.cmu.edu/
i'm sure all the women in the department would LOVE to have some random interrogating them out of the blue about their experiences.
@dn3s I suspect the intention was to reach out to the heads of the department and ask about approaches they have used, not to contact to women who did join and ask them why.
@dn3s: 1. OP would obviously need to sample a few faculty members. 2. With a properly worded introduction, and a question regarding willingness to discuss this issue, recipients would either politely decline or agree, without feeling interrogated by random people.
I removed some debate about whether this should be an answer, a comment, a vote-to-close, a chat discussion, or something else. At this point (four years and 40 upvotes later) it is staying as an answer. However, this is a singular decision and does not create a precedent that answers like this are acceptable generally -- if another case arises in future, we can discuss on meta at that time.
The phenomenon you have observed, where some programs have great difficulty attracting female CS majors (and faculty) and others are approximately 50%, is a classic example of a "tipping point" phenomenon. Tipping point phenomena were modeled in economics by Nobel prizewinning theorist Thomas Schelling. They were popularized by Malcolm Gladwell.
The intuition is this: Everyone faces certain benefits and costs from pursuing a CS degree. The benefits include income, intellectual challenge etc. The costs include hard work, eye strain, etc. In addition, minority individuals face the cost of being an "outsider" in the environment. This "outsider cost" is typically modeled as increasing in the segregation of the field. So a field with 90% men would have a higher outsider cost to a woman than a field with 60% men.
The tipping point comes into play when looking at equilibria. One equilibrium is that there are very few CS women. This is because the outsider cost is so high that only women who highly value the benefits (income, challenge, etc.) have a net positive utility from the CS major. But, if you can nudge the system off this equilibrium and get even a few more women, then you can decrease the outside cost enough that a few additional women find CS net positive. And then these women's presence decreases the costs further, and so on. You progressively tip the scales of cost/benefit such that you reach the second equilibrium of 50/50.
Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here. Before posting a comment below this one, please review the purposes of comments. Comments that do not request clarification or suggest improvements usually belong as an answer, on [meta], or in [chat]. Comments continuing discussion may be removed.
If you want to attract some contingent of students to your institution, then provide an attractive work environment for them. It is really as simple (complex) as that. It doesn't have to be just the male/female breakdown here, but it applies there of course.
First, consider the answer here of user Dawn who suggests a tipping point. But how do you get to the tipping point. Others have suggested money, but I'm pretty sure that is insufficient, though it may be necessary.
First, how many women do you have on the faculty? Is it enough? Why not. Is it harder for them to get tenure? Why is it harder to get tenure? Women (in the US, at least) often have societal demands put on them that they can't avoid and that makes a rapid advance to tenure impossible. In a related case, I had a brilliant female colleague who had to delay her career to take care of an ailing mother. Men almost never have that problem as someone else (a woman) will do that instead. Women also need to have accommodation made for childbirth as no one else will take over that burden. Men don't have to delay family or choose between career and family. Single parents are usually (not always) women. Do you pay young women enough that, especially if they are single parents, they can afford proper childcare without sacrificing their research? Rigid rules around tenure and salary work against you here. Tailor the system so that it is consistent with your overall goals and flexible enough to accommodate special situations.
So, work to build up (and tenure) your female (or other "minority") faculty.
Next is the question of how welcoming the environment is for students. Look not only to universities with a better balance, but look also to small women's colleges (and Historically Black colleges). Why do students want to go there? The faculty has a lot of women, of course, but not all. However, the environment has a lot of people who "look like me." (Tipping point again). But, beyond that, those places also seem to me to be better at mentoring young students. In many of them the faculty and students are on first name basis with one another. The professor becomes a role model, not just a teacher.
So, make sure mentoring happens. This can work for everyone, not just women.
Next, is the actual work schedule sane or insane? Do you require long hours in the lab that may be possible for men (who have external support for the daily tasks of living) and not so much for women (who often are left with those tasks. Does your environment lead to burn out for some? That is unhealthy for everyone and leads to extreme stress. Some questions on this site suggest that it is more common than it should be. Some of the techniques for reducing stress, by the way, require additional time and effort. That may be harder for those with outside responsibilities. On a related note, is your work schedule so intense and competitive that backstabbing among students (or even with professors) happens? Do you have a way to make that stop? A number of questions on this site indicate that it happens more than it should. Even people "stealing" the research product of others.
So, assure that the work schedule is sane and not overly stress inducing.
Next, how are women treated day to day by both faculty and other students. Is there some low level of sexual harassment that is tolerated? Are you sure? There are faculty who prey on students, of course. Are you sure that you have a way to both recognize that and to force it to stop? Do you have formal standards of conduct that apply to both faculty and students. Note that mentoring (of both males and females) can help here. A quiet word from a mentor can change behavior when needed.
So, make sure that no one needs to deal with the "ick factor".
Next, who's questions and opinions are valued? Is it only extroverts who get a chance to say anything or to represent a working group? Does your faculty have sufficient training to assure that every student's ideas are valued? Fairly simple, but required, teaching seminars can improve the classroom/lab environment. They will probably be resented by some, but you have to ask, what is important? If you only value high pressure ego driven research progress, you will attract only people who are comfortable in that environment.
So, consider your values and find ways to operationalize them, not just talk about them.
And note that you don't have to sacrifice research quality or output to do these things. Take CMU, for example.
For what it is worth, I never had a situation in which I thought a female colleague was less able than her peers, including myself. I have a pretty big ego, of course.
And yes, I realize that I answered a slightly different question.
To your question of other institutions getting gender parity: Until visa and exchange rates started making things harder, Australian universities had a lot of Iranian postgraduate students. I noticed that the proportion of women in this cohort was very high, and when I asked some of those (female) students about this they told me that computer science is a popular subject of study for women in Iran, and that they felt very accepted in the field. Articles such as this one from Forbes seem to bear this out. I hesitate to draw any conclusions from this, but it's an interesting example of a place where computer science in not assumed to be a male-oriented field.
At my low-diversity STEM Ph.D. program (arguably top 10), the biggest change we made during recruitment week (a week where accepted student applicants visit the school) was that we hosted a women-only social event. Current female Ph.D. students in the program chatted with female recruits socially. No men were present. Shockingly that year we went from maybe 20% of female recruits accepting offers (in the past) to 100%. I think the event showed that we as a program acknowledge that being female in our field comes with additional challenges, and having a safe space to talk about those challenges is important. I think it also created a sense of social cohesion with the female recruits. They liked each other, they liked the possibility that they could all go to school together. They also got to ask really important questions about the program that they may have felt uncomfortable asking if there were men present. Literally, nothing else changed, this one small change to recruitment week had such a massive effect.
How many offers to female students did your department make?
Maybe 5 to women and 6 to men. It was over 5 years ago so not sure.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.506478 | 2018-10-19T07:13:10 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/118673",
"authors": [
"Allure",
"Brian Borchers",
"Bryan Krause",
"Captain Man",
"Dawn",
"Sean Houlihane",
"WetlabStudent",
"arboviral",
"cag51",
"einpoklum",
"eykanal",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24304",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4453",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/52346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62302",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/73",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7319",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74846",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87952",
"user3067860",
"user371366"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
175831 | How can I work with PhD supervisor/colleagues who insist on using their own timeline?
I'm a PhD-student in (hopefully) my final year of my thesis, but there are still some open tasks before handing in. Since funding has already run out some time ago, I am trying to wrap up everything as soon as possible. Thus, I try to be more pro-active, i.e., do not wait until colleagues or my supervisor are answering mails/setting up meetings, but rather set them up and plan them by myself. This also involves writing meeting notes from meetings covering the next steps and send those to the persons involved.
Especially for planning future steps I usually prefer to get responses within a reasonable time frame (i.e., usually within two workdays) such that I can continue with the discussed tasks as soon as possible. If I do not get responses within that time frame I earlier could assume that everyone agreed with the results and next steps.
Now, during the recent months my supervisor and colleagues started working together and increasingly ignored the summaries. On multiple occasions the decisions of earlier meetings were completely neglected and the direction of the project was changed, meaning that I had to discard my work done until that point to start from scratch again. When bringing that up my supervisor stated that I should be more aware of the schedule of the people involved, and therefore understand that getting answers/change suggestions can take up to several weeks. He stated that I should be more relaxed, something which is getting more difficult for me in light of the situation stated above.
I currently do not know how to handle the situation, and how to improve it (if possible). Thus:
Are my expectations to get responses in a timely manner (i.e., two workdays) too high? I know that my colleagues and my supervisor are busy, but I'd still appreciate it if I would not have to deal with changes introduced several days or weeks later.
What would be the best strategy to improve the current work situation, to finish the project within a reasonable time frame? To a similar question it was suggested to set own deadlines for answers, comments, etc., but that failed in my case.
Hmmm. Are you trying to take over the supervisor's job? Their authority?
Or, are you that student who, when put on a team, decides to do the work all by themself? I hate to seem harsh, but it reads like you lack something about the concept of teamwork.
Your supervisor is your boss. Bosses tend to prefer to work on their, and not their employees timeline. It’s a good idea to set up meetings and write notes, but don’t expect to be able to will your boss into changing how they operate. The attempt alone can easily be off-putting. For better or for worse, you likely have to accept that.
@Buffy: It might have been written like that, but I definitely do not try to take up all the work in a team. I would rather expect clear expectations, such that I can work on those tasks (thus I took up writing the notes), and it can be frustrating if I've been told several weeks later that I misunderstood something in the meeting, and therefore all my work during those weeks is in vain. To avoid spending time on tasks which are not necessary I therefore try to clarify as much as possible before starting. I hope that that clarifies the situation a bit?
@gnometorule: I understand that, even if it might be frustrating sometimes. But yes, you might be right in that case.
It's debatable whether, when funding has run out, the supervisor is still the student's boss. If this means what it would where I live, that means the OP is working in an unpaid capacity as part of the supervisor's lab. In that context I don't think it's unreasonable to be annoyed that one is having to regularly discard work because people are not responding (even to note they will follow up with more detail later) in a timely manner.
"Thus, I tried to be more pro-active, i.e. do not wait until colleagues or my supervisor are answering mails/setting up meetings ..." - let me just tell you, I think you sound like a perfect fit for an industry job :-)
@user_0815 Occasional misunderstandings happen. However, if there is a regular misunderstanding of tasks that need a lot of time to be completed and later have to be scrapped, then you need to find out whether your boss is simply communicating badly and you need more elicit clarifying information or whether you tend to misinterpret them (again clarifying questions can help here) or go off prematurely on something you think you understand (but don't). Is that the case? If so, there is a quite fundamental issue in your communication that has slowed you down. Not exactly your question.
@CaptainEmacs: I am not sure if there are misunderstandings, or simply changes of direction, but to be sure of that I tried to sum up those meetings, such that I can refer to them afterwards. Also, in case of questions arising after meetings those notes can be quite helpful, but they are entirely useless if the notes are either not confirmed by colleagues or discarded as "you have misunderstood something" after several weeks. This is the main reason of why I would like to receive feedback within a reasonable time frame.
@Buffy is it wrong to be "that student" even when your colleagues finish up their part just a day before the meeting/deadlines and your work depends on their results in some capacity?
@helperFunction, yes indeed, it is wrong and a failure of "teamwork" from the start. Teamwork doesn't mean divide up the work. That is a plan guaranteed to fail. It also adds additional work - integration of the parts.
@Buffy in that situation, what according to you would be the right way of handling things?
@helperFunction, make it a team. Have meetings, work together. For a software project, learn about Agile Software Development and its practices, some of which can be applied to other domains.
If OP is independent, that's great. I am a big fan of PhD students that set their own schedule and are proactive, as long as they are reasonably capable of taking a sensible route.
If a student would start foisting a time table and response times upon me, however, and insist on them being followed, we would have a discrete "tete-a-tete" about who is in charge of setting the schedule.
Now, of course, you are under time pressure; we do not know what was the cause of that or who was responsible for that - but from your question it seems that you regularly went off into directions which were later canceled. We do not know whether this is because your supervisor would be a pedant, or because you might have been more enthusiastic than discerning. This may have cost you a lot of time in the past.
Also, you talk about "tried to be more proactive." That indicates that there was another problem in the past; we do not know what it was, but perhaps you were too reactive in the past and you now try to compensate for that - but you cannot dump recovery from past mistakes onto your supervisor to fix.
All this is reading between the lines of your question, and the matter may have been entirely different.
Your funding problem is the real issue here, it appears. Ask your supervisor what can be done to alleviate your problem. If additional funding cannot be found, ask them what they advise for you to be able to finish as quickly as possible. Be respectful, they may be able to help you in your situation - but, by no means impose your pacing onto them.
My main reason for becoming more "pro-active" was the feedback from my supervisor. Initially I did not write notes and asked for confirmation, but after he changed expectations and parameters several times weeks after starting the experiment while stating that he always intended the experiment to be run in his way, and I misunderstood in our meeting I decided to write notes, such that I at least have a guideline to follow and to refer to.
@user_0815 Yes, that's precisely what I suspected. It is now clear that you were originally not pro-active enough, but now you seem to be overshooting in the other direction. There is a clear mismatch between what your supervisor expects and how you work, and it appears to lie at the bottom of your issues. Since you are towards the end of your thesis, probably your best bet is to discuss with your supervisor how to optimally accelerate your thesis.
I tried to, but he insists on finishing all experiments/simulations/papers/etc. first, which is difficult if those requirements get changed or extended constantly.
@user_0815 I see. That's a problem, indeed. You may need to be concrete on the timeline with your supervisor and check how this can be cast in stonenow.
Are my expectations to get responses in a timely manner (i.e. two workdays) too high?
Yeah, I think that's a high expectation. In some groups it may be possible, but especially to expect this from a group of multiple people each who have their own responsibilities both to themselves and others I think is too high. I'd set about a week as a low end for expectations, partly on the basis that most people have a somewhat weekly schedule (that is, if they have more free time on Thursdays, it's like that free time recurs every Thursday). However, some times people have other "one-time" events that may make them unreachable for longer (their own deadline, particular busy parts of a course year such as before/after exams, etc).
What would be the best strategy to improve the current work situation, to finish the project within a reasonable time frame?
It sounds like you're soliciting a lot of feedback for this stage in your project. By now you should somewhat know what you're doing and who you're working with. You should be able to anticipate some of the feedback you get and pursue alternative directions without getting instruction.
For things you need immediate feedback on, especially from more than one stakeholder, schedule meetings. Prepare all the information necessary to make the decision, present it concisely, and get your answer. I do think it's generally reasonable to have a weekly meeting scheduled with the people you work closely with, but that's not reasonable for everyone. However, if you're someone that needs a weekly meeting to be productive and your supervisor isn't, well...you're pretty much out of luck by this stage on that one, you'll just have to manage. This is sort of "week/month one" negotiation stuff, or things to work out before you even start.
If you have more than one thing going at once (you mention multiple "tasks" that need completing), structure your work so that you can be waiting for feedback on some things while preparing others.
Lastly, work with your advisor on a reasonable timeline. Instead of asking for more rapid feedback (your solution), present them with your problem (needing to graduate by some date) and ask for guidance. At some point one simply has to stop iterating on things. There is no natural defined end beyond which there is no more work to do for most academic projects.
We worked out a timeline for the project several times, but each time requirements changed (or were added by him), resulting in delays. Therefore, at least for me it is difficult to believe that new timelines will help much here.
@user_0815 You don't need to make a "new" timeline, you need to work together to stick to the old one. So, if something new is added that takes more of the finite time remaining, then something else has to be dropped. What would your advisor suggest dropping to incorporate the new requirement? In addition, your timeline needs to budget for things to change because things always do. It's not realistic to budget only for everything to work perfectly the first time.
You are trying to boss your advisor around, and that is not going to work. Other answers have had much good advice on alternatives.
I would like to focus on one detail in your question:
the direction of the project was changed, meaning that I could discard my work done until that point to start from scratch again.
This is not acceptable. It is way to late for changing directions. Push back on this.
We are talking about your thesis. Your advisor can offer advice, but you decide whether that advice is good or not. And if they are too busy to talk to you, make your own decisions and stick to them.
Once you get out of the "three steps forward and two steps back" routine, you should be able to reach the goal in a reasonable time.
I am not sure how to push back on it if my supervisor finally is responsible for saying "Yes, you can submit this thesis." Unless I could finish all the tasks he gave me this will not happen...
I think you cannot steer your supervisor and the research project. Everybody besides you have multiple other duties like different research projects, other PhD students to supervise, writing proposals, reading theses, writing papers, teaching, and so on. They have to balance the amount of their time they spent to these topics.
Further, your personal goals (finishing your PhD in a timely manner) does not necessarily align with the research group (research breakthrough, some long-term goal, creating PhD thesis topics, being interesting for industrial collaborators, preparing research questions for the next grant).
So you cannot change how fast you get answers and you cannot change the research group. I think you should try to decouple your PhD thesis from the research in the group.
Sit down with your advisor and define what you still need to do for your thesis. Both of you have to agree, that once you covered the defined scope, you are allowed to write up your thesis, hand it in, and defend. Beside that, you can or cannot invest in the common research direction - that depends on what you can negotiate with your advisor. Their slow pace will help you allocating your time to your personal research, to aim finishing your work.
Good luck.
The issue here is that my supervisor still tries to change the scope of the work by extending it after meetings, even if the opposite was discussed during the meeting. This is the reason I try to keep notes, to verify if it was my memory which failed (and the topic came up during the meeting) or he changed his mind afterwards.
@user_0815 That is a problem. You have to make an appointment and nail him down on a scope and make it clear to him, that you want to write your thesis with this scope. If the project changes, that's fine and you will support them. But you make it clear to him, that it is time for you to wrap your PhD thesis up.
Are my expectations to get responses in a timely manner (i.e. two workdays) too high? I know that my colleagues and my supervisor are busy, but I'd still appreciate it if I would not have to deal with changes introduced several days or weeks later.
From my experience, a one-word answer is yes, your expectation here is unrealistic. I state later why I say so.
What would be the best strategy to improve the current work situation, to finish the project within a reasonable time frame? To a similar question it was suggested to set own deadlines for answers/comments/etc., but that failed in my case.
I would think that a hard deadline is the best way - where you leave your current position and/or move to your next employment. In most cases, the first vision of a PhD project is not achieved - which is fine. One of the outcomes of a PhD project is also your career training and that is non-negotiable. Apart from that, if your university requires you to have certain requirements fulfilled before defending your thesis, that should be done as well. On the research outcomes, by the time you finish your PhD, the experiments/data/code should have been documented properly and have reached a stage to be made publicly available if that is what your group has agreed to do.
The thing is your research project(s) is only a part of your colleagues' (including your supervisor) ongoing projects. They should prioritise your projects since a PhD is a hard deadline, unlike their employment which might not be for a limited period, but placing unrealistic conditions on them would harm your collaborations with them. There are other factors (family, life and so on) that determine how much and when they can focus on working on common projects with you.
My suggestion is that having end goals for your PhD to achieve some research outcomes is a great way to approach and tackle your PhD - since it gives meaning to what we do. But it is a problem if it gets in the way of you collaborating with others and makes you non-flexible and non-adaptable - both to the research goals and to the schedule. One of the other outcomes of PhD is also to work with people on big projects (longer timeline and goals which typical PhD projects are).
I would suggest having open communication with your group - tell them why a certain deadline is important to you in the long term and give them the room to think and react when they want instead of requiring them to respond within 2 days. Giving them the benefit of doubt when they are late in responding is also good for your health and nerves (you can think and work on your personal projects in the meanwhile). These are positive collaborating practices and is conducive to your career growth and good health in the long term. In the end, if you feel like the grand goal of your PhD is unattainable due to the pace of the work, it is still fine since you do grow out of your PhD and have learned something in the process.
Hope this helps.
Getting timely responses/decisions by email in academia is in my experience a lost cause. However, if you're scheduling regular meetings (which are the right way to make time-sensitive decisions, imo), you shouldn't have to deal with things by email. I would suggest that you try to be clearer about meeting agendas and conclusions.
It sounds like during meetings, you and your PI/collaborators aren't on the same page about when you're making a firm decision about the next steps in the project, and when you're having a general discussion about possible options. So you need to be very explicit about what you need, what you're planning, etc - and you need to do that during the meeting, not by email, because emails clearly aren't a good communication medium for these kinds of issues in your group.
Before the meeting, send everyone an email summarizing what you want to talk about and what decisions you need to be made.
At the end of the meeting, state what you understand the decision to be and what you plan to do as a result, and ask if everyone agrees with that and if they have other concerns. If people have concerns or the decision is unclear, you want to make sure that this is figured out during the meeting, instead of by email afterward. If it looks like things are unclear, schedule another meeting (or extend the current meeting if possible).
Your goal is to make sure that by the end of the meeting, everyone understands what decisions have been made and what you will be spending your time doing, so that if they decide to change direction later, they know this will cause wasted work on your part.
That said, projects pretty much inevitably involve changing directions and wasted effort going into different things that end up not working out - if everyone already knew what they were doing, it wouldn't be academia! So it's possible that everyone does already understand how much time you're spending on backtracking and wasted work, and they think that's how science normally works. (They may be right! There's not enough detail to tell.) In that case you have a larger-scale problem, and you should talk about that with your PI and ask if there's anything that can be done about it, possibly by making your work more independent.
Since funding has already run out some time ago, I am trying to wrap up everything as soon as possible
I think this is the key issue. The project suddenly became much more urgent to you, but it did not get any more urgent to anyone else. Your advisor and other stakeholders are still getting their normal salary and so are still on the same pace they used to be, you are trying to accelerate the pace.
The only way to solve this is make your advisor or other stakeholders truly understand why this is so urgent to you, and get them to feel the same urgency.
Read the book "Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It" by Chris Voss. One key takeaway from this book: phrase questions your advisor in the form of "how am I supposed to?" For example "As you know, the funding has run out a long time ago. I can't get a job until I finish my dissertation, but I can't finish my dissertation due to XYZ issues. I have $X left in my bank account. How am I supposed to pay my rent and buy food once that runs out?"
He might answer this by solving the problem in a different way. For example, maybe he knows of some other source of funding get you through until the end. Or maybe he agrees to speed up his timetable.
My supervisor mostly cares about the main project to be finished, but keeps changing directions of the experiments (which is the reason I am trying to keep notes and to verify them after meetings). He does not care about my funding issues, and keeps telling me to just find a job. How, that is up to me.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.507850 | 2021-09-23T18:54:20 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/175831",
"authors": [
"Bryan Krause",
"Buffy",
"Captain Emacs",
"alan ocallaghan",
"gnometorule",
"helperFunction",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/147288",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/147323",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36538",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4384",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/45857",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/78796",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/98006",
"trolle3000",
"user_0815",
"usr1234567"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
178801 | Peer reviewing with dyslexia
Background
I am a postdoc in theoretical physics and have severe dyslexia. A consequence of my dyslexia is that I have a very low reading ability and comprehension level - in the lowest 1st percentile.
It is very hard for me to read a single paper - to learn new topics I often find it easier to jump around different sources of information extracting key bits from each (something I believe is common in dyslexics).
(Note: I want to make it slightly clear that the struggles of someone with dyslexia are different from those who are not native speakers)
Situation
I have recently been asked to do my first peer-review - something I knew would eventually happen and something I have been dreading. I know the importance of peer review for academia and therefore it is not something I want to try and get out off.
The question
Are there any (well-tested) techniques to aid in good, efficient and fun peer reviewing for someone who has difficulty with comprehension?
Is it only with the written word that your comprehension suffers? You must have used some effective techniques to get you to where you are? How did that go?
@Buffy Yes, mainly written word. I can follow talks more easily. I guess the main technique I currently use is to actually just work things out for myself, with information gathered through different places (e.g. talks, lecture notes, or papers). But I never read full papers - I usually read a sentence or two about the bit I'm currently trying to understand.
You have my sympathy. I have dyslexia,(and dyspraxia) and i find reviewing difficult, but not unenjoyable. I just have accept that a review my colleagues will dash off in 2-3 hours will take me two days, and plan accordingly. On a practical note, you might try read aloud software to have to computer read the paper to tou.
@IanSudbery Thanks for this comment. I do use text-to-speech software. That said, it is slightly lacking when it comes to reading documents with lots of maths in - making it sometimes more of a pain to use than its worth. As a side project I am actually trying to write a LaTex to Speech Synthesis Markup Language `converter' which would solve this issue but it's not ready to handle full latex documents yet.
If you have difficulty writing, that might be addressed by creating an audio recording that peer reviews the document. In my experience, journals will let you upload any file with your peer review. This probably does not answer your question, but it could help other individuals with dyslexia.
@AnonymousPhysicist I do like this suggestion and use audio recordings in a lot of my personal life - there is, however, a loss of confidentiality in this case. Especially if the authors know the reviewer.
@JosephTooby-Smith Any reasonable journal editor will consider accessibility more important than anonymity. The audio recording conflicts with anonymity, not confidentiality. In physics, the reviewer is anonymous. The review is confidential. You should not review the work of people you know too well.
@AnonymousPhysicist Agreed - to all points.
How many reviewers does the journal use? If you're one of 2 or 3 reviewers you may be able to review while acknowledging (to the editor) that some aspects are harder than others to review thoroughly, but if you're the only reviewer (some APS journals for example) that's not an option.
Do dyslexic fonts such as Opendyslexic help? https://opendyslexic.org/ If so, you could ask the editor if the paper could be generated with the best font for you. This should be virtually no effort with Latex or Word
I believe I've seen Emacs support for text-to-speech synthesis, and as Emacs supports LaTeX sources as well, that might be a low hanging fruit or two there.
Difficulty writing… avoiding recordings… I’m not dyslexic, but s dyslexic friend used speech recognition SW, as do I ~75% of the time. Basic dictation IMHO ok). Programmers (including TeX users) often need extension packages written in Basic or Python or … I haven’t tried math/TeX/LaTeX myself yet, but web users report success. BTW Windows Nuance Dragon is the best around, only buy the professional version so that you can write your own extensions. I hope one day open source peech recognition will be competitive. Remote to *ic widely used.
@KrazyGlew Dragon is good - I've used it in the past. Annoyingly they discontinued there mac version though.
Yes, many regret tDragon\Mac’s demise. But many report success controlling Mac/Unix apps via remote access, eg ssh, from a Windows PC using Dragon. you lose the parsing of menus, but you can still use app/window context sensitive commands. Especially using an X Windows server on PC, eg from Cygwin. Similarly, running Dragon\Windows in a Parallels virtual machine to control the Mac it is running on. I have not tried, though.
Let me suggest a strategy. It depends on the paper to be reviewed not requiring extreme confidentiality. A variation on this technique is used fairly often by senior professors.
Find one or two students at the university. I'd suggest two, actually, and work together as a team to analyze and discuss the paper. Depend on them for the written stuff and use your own knowledge and background to fill in things they need to know to understand the work.
Having two students lets you encourage them to work together to explore the topic further without you needing to always be in the loop. Meet as necessary, say an hour per week.
The students will actually benefit from this if the paper is at all related to their studies. Even undergraduates can benefit from a deep, but guided, look at current work. They will benefit not just from reading the paper and trying to understand it, but more, I think, in trying to explain it to you and each other.
Some places will find a way for them to get a bit of academic credit for such things.
I can see this been a very useful technique, although feel it is more likely to work for professors then post-docs. In terms of getting access to willing students etc.
Talk to one of the profs that advises students in your field. I'd think Cornell would be a good place to make this work.
Maybe your place is full of exceptional people, but generally students to not have the skill (or lets say experience) to do meaningful peer review. Exception maybe end of PhD students. Generally you should have gone through the process yourself a few times and should also have a (quite) comprehensive knowledge of the whole subject.
@lalala it's not unknown for PhD students to be asked to review papers. I checked with with my supervisor that this was reasonable before agreeing; I did wonder if he'd actually arranged to punt the review to me.
I have reviewed a journal article as a PhD student which was eventually published, as an undergraduate would probably be unusual though.
@Tom, I wasn't suggesting that the review be passed on to an undergrad, which would defeat the OPs purpose. But studying a paper and discussing it is something valuable in multiple ways, both for the OP and for the students, not to mention the journal.
Are there any (well-tested) techniques to aid in ... fun peer-reviewing
Disregarding the rest of your question, if you are not comfortable peer reviewing something, just decline the invitation to peer review. In my experience, peer reviewing is not fun.
If you want to be helpful, you can be very helpful by suggesting a few alternative peer reviewers.
Physics documents are not accessible to people with disabilities - it's good that you're working to fix this with your text-to-speech side project.
I actually declined to peer review a few days ago, due to disability. Probably the disability is temporary.
Just don't peer review. It is not mandatory to peer review anything. It's not in your contract, nobody will complain to your boss, and you will not get fired because of it. You can even decline, saying that you do not review any papers due to your disability, reducing the number of invites you get.
The consequence will be that you (probably) won't be asked to become an editor, and your papers might be judged a bit more harshly by a spiteful editor, and in your CV, you won't be able to claim that you reviewed for XYZ. You might feel like you owe it to the community or publishers (you don't), in which case you can just do something else to ease your conscience, like organizing a conference.
I disagree. Reviewing is a valuable experience. There is no reason to avoid it if you can find a way to make it work.
But most of any status peer review. There must be a reason why they do it.
I'm surprised no one has suggested this but you could also request the editor for more time to do the review.
I don't mean to apply any label to you which you might not be comfortable with, but in many countries dyslexia is considered a disability and therefore would entitle you to reasonable accommodation.
I doubt any laws would apply since reviewing is normally just volunteer work. The journal has deadlines, of course, and authors need some timely feedback. But, I agree that asking for time is fine.
Also, publishing and reviewing is typically an international activity, so I wouldn't emphasize national laws/policies, unless the publisher has to follow certain rules about accommodations because of where they're headquartered or "do business."
If automated text readers are not up to snuff, but you still wish to review the paper, perhaps it's possible to find someone who can read the text to you? Probably someone with enough maths background to be able to read formulas, but it doesn't have to be someone familiar with the field. You could pay them for their time.
My thought was the OP might be able to read it out loud and record it. I think they could do this one sentence at a time. Puzzle out a sentence first, record reading it, pause, puzzle out the next sentence, record, pause... And then play it back as a single thing. But it might be very, very slow going, so not sure it's entirely worth it.
@user3067860 Yes, sounds very tedious. OP already mentioned that they use automated text readers and that it's a step up from reading it themselves, however it apparently fails miserably when it comes to math formulas. So I think the next step up is another human being reading the text. That should be significantly better.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.509797 | 2021-12-05T19:06:46 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/178801",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Buffy",
"Chris H",
"Ian Sudbery",
"Joseph Tooby-Smith",
"Kimball",
"Krazy Glew",
"Peter Mortensen",
"Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen",
"Tom",
"Vilx-",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/109243",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117021",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13013",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/150039",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/150064",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24304",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/473",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75206",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82972",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8494",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/92334",
"lalala",
"tcapwasraw",
"user3067860"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
183879 | How should I write a letter to ask the author of a research paper some questions?
Can I write:
Hi Prof. xxx,
I am xxx, PhD student from xx University. Recently I am studying your paper titled “xxx” in xxx. Could you please help me understand why xxx? I assume that there may be two reasons: 1)xxx 2) xxx.
Thank you so much for your time.
Sincerely,
xxx
xx University
Standard salutation would be "Dear Prof. xxx, ..." instead of "Hi". I would only use "Hi" with someone I am on a first-name basis with.
Just as a side note, not all authors of papers (not even the first authors) will be professors, but much more often PhD students just like you.
What is the reason to write the letter? Do you want to make contact with them, or do you not understand xxx? If the latter, would steps did you do to understand xxx?
Your email template is already better than 50% of the ones I receive....
As an alternative to writing a formal email you could try finding the author, preferably first or last author, on a social platform like ResearchGate or LinkedIn and then reaching out there.
When I was a student I liked to also mention my advisor and my area of research, and maybe a few words about how the author's paper related to my research. Of course, this only makes sense if you already have an advisor and a project, but the more the author understands about who you are and how they are helping you, the better.
I also agree with the others that it's better to start with "Dear Prof. xxxx" (if the author is in fact a professor).
It sounds not very professional. I would suggest writing "Dear Prof. .." Here is an edited version of your letter:
Dear Prof. xxx,
I am a PhD student from xx University. Recently, I came across your paper titled “xxx” in xxx. Could you please help me to understand why xxx? I assume that there may be two reasons: 1)xxx 2) xxx. I would greatly appreciate your response.
Best regards, xxx, xx University
Yes, you could write that and you might get a reply. It is possible that you won't, but it seems polite enough that the chances are good.
It might take a while for a reply (weeks), however, since people are busy and it might take some time to reflect on the proper response. And the reply might just be a pointer to somewhere you can get additional background.
As user spin notes in a comment, a more formal salutation would be better, however. Some places can be quite formal.
I assume that in principle authors are happy that people read their work and are curious about it. Would it help in your opinion to make the author curious about the work of the OP that leads him to write the letter, for example by outlining one's work, providing a link to a paper, or giving some other detail? Also, I'd (naively) write something like "I am particularly intrigued by your innovative [insert field specific thing here, like strategy to compensate for measurement errors] which leads me to the following questions: ..." Would such a rationale be a good idea?
@Peter-ReinstateMonica, generally, for a first contact a short message is better than a long one. It can open a conversation. If the receiver is overwhelmed by the size/complexity of a first (blind) email it is easy to just delete it.
Yes, I suppose that's the dilemma.
"I am particularly intrigued by your innovative..." I would avoid that, reactions to flattery are not always positive (it may come across as insincere). I suspect most authors would regard evidence that someone had actually read the paper and had questions to be more than sufficient as a complement ;o) I'd definitely prefer a short to the point email.
Yes you can ask. But your current version has some issues.
Hi Prof. xxx,
Use a more formal way to address him in the first e-mail. There is a chance that he will answer less formal, but you don't know in advance, so be more formal for the first e-mail.
I am xxx, PhD student from xx University. Recently I am studying your paper titled “xxx” in xxx. Could you please help me understand why xxx?
This sounds like "I need a teacher that helps me understand my assignments". The professor will see it as not being his duty to help students to do their work.
First, really try to do your own research. What don't you understand, do some of the references in the paper explain it? Can you find other material or textbooks that help? Ask another student or staff from your faculty.
Then, of course, the paper can be hard to read and a question is still justified. Try to explain in a concise way what you don't understand and ask a question as concrete as possible.
I assume that there may be two reasons: 1)xxx 2) xxx.
That's a good way to approach the issue. Tell (without too much text) what you didn't understand and what you think what may be meant but doesn't quite sum up for you. Don't go into too much detail, as you obviously did not understand it and explaining your wrong version doesn't help the author. But write enough that he is able to see what you didn't understand.
Thank you so much for your time.
Personally I would not exaggerate here. A simple "Thank you for your time" is appropriate, but the "so much" may be a bit over the top.
They may be a professor and you're "just" a student, but in the end you're both just persons and you can ask questions like any other person. So I'd be polite, but don't exaggerate.
Yes, demonstrated effort is always good.
As an author, I appreciate it when someone shows interest in my work. I have no issue with responding to specific questions or engaging in a discussion.
That said, when you reach out to an author you should show competence in the area and ask relevant questions. The template you posted looks fine.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.510830 | 2022-04-04T13:23:45 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/183879",
"authors": [
"Ander Biguri",
"Buffy",
"Cam",
"Dikran Marsupial",
"Peter - Reinstate Monica",
"Peter Mortensen",
"Sursula",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/133549",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/16023",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/2827",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/30987",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46191",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/473",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/61376",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75206",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"lalala",
"spin"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
185663 | How can I explain bad grades in a PhD application due to bad lecturers?
I am an undergraduate studying in Australia aiming for a US PhD program. I want to apply for a PhD in statistics. I have good grades in all of my math and stats courses in general.
Unfortunately, the statistics department has quite a few very bad lecturers. And the two lowest grades I got are from two probability and statistical courses. As the discipline I am applying for is statistics, I think I really need to explain them in my materials.
These two courses were organized badly. For one of them, the lecturer was basically incompetent. For the other one, the lecturer might be a good researcher, but horrible at teaching. I am not the only student saying this; numerous complaints were filed for these two courses and many students dropped out during the term. I worked hard on these courses, but the results are still significantly lower than what I would normally achieve.
How could I properly address my lower-than-expected performance in these two courses, and if I should address them at all?
I am afraid if I say something negative towards my lecturers, I might leave a bad impression to people in the admission committee since many of them are lecturers themselves.
Are these courses graded on a curve? Was the average grade in these courses significantly lower than in others?
I don't know. But for one course, I actually asked for a review, and the lecturer couldn't even tell me clearly where I lost many marks. I think she gave grades by her "feeling" of our paper in general. You wouldn't believe for the final containing 4 questions, 3 of them had errors...
Excellent approach : it’s not you fault but the lecturer’s fault. Did you do enough to achieve a better grade? Did you rely solely on the lecturer’s course or did you also study additional material ( of the two courses you want to start a PhD in!)? Did you not realise the problem before the exam? From what you write in your question it seems you are the only person to blame.
A PhD is supposed to learn independently. You can't blame the lecturer when you failed to learn. Sorry to to be blunt but... The stink is on you.
It rarely comes over well if you blame others.
You were at university, not school. It was your job to teach yourself, not your lecturers. Lecturers lecture, they don't teach. If your lecturers weren't good at lecturing then you should have gone off and found other materials.
Nobody is going to hold your hand through your PhD either: to be honest, with this attitude, I don't think a PhD is for you.
Well, it's always easy to blame others, but this also applies to many comments I got. Maybe for people who talk here with superiority, I hope you could independently learn anything in any situation and excel in any exam thrown at you. Altough reading some of your unconstructive remarks ruined my morning, let's just stop here as maybe you just had a bad day.
@zlb I sympathise, and the added issues from COVID would have made this worse. But are you sure a PhD's for you if you can't learn independently?
@zlb And if the marks were outright unfair, what did the appeals process say?
Related/duplicate: Should I mention in my personal statement that my poor performance in mathematics courses was due to the course delivery not being effective for me?
Some comments here imply that bad grades are entirely the fault of the student. Often this is true, but not always. By analogy, if you're going to a new place, you could drive yourself, learning from a map, or take a taxi/uber. If someone else drives, they might be worse than if you drove yourself for the first time. A truly bad teacher can certainly be worse than teaching yourself. Learning through a class takes both student and teacher effort, and in some cases a teacher may be significantly at fault for reduced learning.
When I was a Masters student 30 years or so ago, a group of second year mathematics students complained to the department head that one of the second year calculus lecturers was incompetent, and they weren't learning anything from his lectures. The department head hired me to run some extra classes for these students, covering material from the second year calculus course. The feedback from the students was entirely positive - they learnt much more from my classes than from the official lectures. The point is, these students recognised the fact that they weren't learning, took some ...
... initiative, and asked for help. The result was that their problem was dealt with BEFORE their final exam. If you're in a less than ideal learning situation, and you don't take the initiative to solve the problem, then I'd have to agree with most of the commenters here. Any blame lies mostly with you.
I recommend you don't mention this at all. Here are some reasons:
Variation in the quality of lecturers is already built into the grades and GPAs of all other students, so this does not raise any special issue that differentiates your experience from the experience of other applicants. While cases of lecturing leading to student complaints is unusual, it is not so rare that other students would not also have experienced it. It is rare to meet a university graduate who cannot point to at least one bad lecturer they had, or even one who could reasonably be described as incompetent. (Note: I am not endorsing this situation; just observing that it is the reality of academia at the moment.)
Following on from this, reporting bad quality lecturing as a reason for bad performance is likely to sound churlish. Admissions committees want to know that incoming students are professionally generous people who can act in a collegial way in the Department. Ideally they want people who are tolerant of shortcomings in others, don't draw attention to these shortcomings unless absolutely necessary, and are able to work around deficiencies in the work of others without complaint. Over the course of your own career you will probably make some mistakes and do some work that turns out to be of insufficient quality --- learn to tolerate that in others. As Kant said (although he said it in German), "Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made."
The explanation you propose to give identifies the problem for your bad performance as being located in someone else. The admissions committee will want to know what deficiencies you can identify in yourself that come out of this experience, and what action you have taken to improve since then. For example, if you can't follow along with certain lecturers (e.g., because they are bad teachers), what alternative sources of learning do you seek out, and what have you done since then to ensure that you can learn material independently?
Finally, assuming your report of this is accurate, and even assuming we accept that these were indeed bad teachers, it will indicate that you find it difficult to succeed in statistical learning from independent written resources without lecturer assistance. There is a lot of this type of learning in a PhD program, so anything you say that indicates a difficulty learning independently will count against your application.
If you feel the need to say something about these cases, or if you are asked about them, it would be best simply to say that you had difficulty following the lecturers in those cases. Avoid any criticism of the lecturer and focus on your own inability to follow along, then explain what you have done since this time to put yourself in a better position for learning in cases where you have difficulty following the lecturer. Any experienced academic will read the obvious variation in lecture quality into this without you needing to say it. They will appreciate if you "take the bullet" for the outcome instead of blaming your lecturer.
Thank you for your suggestion, Ben. Not mentioning the issue altogether seems to be a better choice. If I do decide to address the results, I think I will blame myself on the lack of enough practice side.
@zlb Yes, but don't mention it. There are other questions on this site of a similar nature, and the general consensus is that one or two "bad" grades won't kill your application, and you don't want to draw attention to these things.
I thought exactly about your last bullet point when I read it. The conversation would go something like: "I had bad lecturers for my course, so I did badly." "Did you read textbooks independently to improve your knowledge of things you didn't understand?" "No, I just went into the exam not understanding it." "Then how will you do in a PhD, where you don't get a lecturer at all?"
While I agree with your recommendation to not blame the lecturer, I feel that your arguments are unfair to the student. Yes, it's pointless to blame the lecturer in the application, since the committee won't take the student at her word, and even if it did, having excuses for bad performance just isn't as valuable as having evidence of good performance. But not all students have to deal with the same number of poor lecturers, some students have it better. And it is not fair that the student is expected to tolerate others' shortcomings when no one will tolerate her own shortcomings.
“Don’t mention it at all” is the right answer for the application materials. But interviewers may well ask about the bad grades, so OP should have a good response prepared for that situation.
Whether you paid or not for your degree is a big factor here. In many countries, it's cheap or free for undergrad, but in the US for example, it's life debilitatingly expensive. Because you are paying so much, your professor really aught to be "good" because the grade they give you makes or breaks your entire career, and the excuse "Well YoU ShOuLD HaVe FoUnD a BeTtEr SoUrCe" is not valid at all for undergrad, for then what exactly are you paying for? Normally though, even in the US, you don't pay for graduate (STEM) degrees. That's when it's valid to switch mindsets.
I agree completely with Ben's answer: you should not attempt to blame your lecturers in your application materials, even if your complaints are justified. Most students have to deal with their fair share of poor lecturers; further, even poor lecturers typically give a reasonable proportion of good grades.
One point to add: if there really was an anomalous circumstance that put you in a truly unusual situation, then it would be far better if the person writing your letter of recommendation explained this situation in their letter. The report of an anomalous circumstance will carry much more weight if it comes from a professor, who is more impartial and has more insight into what is usual and unusual. Of course, it would be highly unusual for a letter writer to criticize their colleagues and state that grades were assigned unfairly, so this option will only be available in highly unusual circumstances (which does not appear to be the case here).
Upvoted for the statement here that others (letter writers) are much better at explaining anomalies than the candidate themself. A student can't really say "My professor is an idiot", but a professor can say "My colleague has issues that affect this student".
Your best option is to say nothing, and talk about your strengths rather than weaknesses. Most students have weaknesses, whether it's low grades in some courses or something else. Admission committees know that it's rare to get a student with no flaws, so what's important is whether the student's strengths are worth tolerating those flaws.
This is assuming you're not applying to the very top programs. There, bad grades in a fundamental course are unlikely to fly, unless you have some truly amazing accomplishments to balance it out.
Your plan of excusing the bad grades by citing lecturer incompetence is a bad idea. There are too many students who do poorly in a course and blame the instructor. There's no way to know whether you are one of those. Other students agreeing with you means little: Most students are not good enough for PhD programs, hence a minority of applicants get admitted. Besides, the committee is not going to canvas your classmates or look up your teachers on ratemyprofessors.com, they'll just throw your application in the bottom of the pile, and see if they can find a less complicated application. Moreover, some may very well feel that you should have found a way to teach yourself the topic regardless of poor instruction (such as reading the textbook) - in research, one often must learn things without any instruction at all.
If your grades in statistics are truly bad, I would recommend not applying to PhD programs in statistics right now. This by itself is a very strong reason not to admit you and no amount of skillful rhetoric in the application will save you. If it sounds unfair, it is - students from grade inflated schools absolutely have an advantage over others, but such is life. If you try to apply anyway, you will be fighting an uphill battle. I recommend delaying your application and taking some steps first to even the odds a little:
Do an internship, get a job, or find some other way to obtain experience that will make you seem impressive to the program you're applying for regardless of grades - typically you want something where you get research experience, ideally with publication authorship
Do a project or take a more advanced course in statistics and do really well, which would show that your understanding of statistics is strong in spite of bad grades in lower level courses - this would be the best way of "excusing" your earlier poor grades
You'd have to separately research what specific topics would impress PhD programs in your field. Usually some kind of short program can tick a lot of the boxes, such as a Master's Degree, or working in a research group. You'd lose 1-2 years but end up qualifying for a much better PhD program.
(+1) I totally agree with your 3rd paragraph, especially the well explained rationales for your advice to say nothing.
I'm not sure that the reason for the bad grades is really relevant. If the professors didn't teach the material well, you didn't learn the subject, and that's what the other programs presumably care about. So unless you believe you did learn the material (on your own, presumably), but for some reason the course grade doesn't reflect this, the grades should stand.
Yes, this puts you in a lousy situation if you're applying for positions in this field, but you really should have expertise in the field you plan to work in. If you've tried to remedy the problem by studying independently, you could mention that to mitigate the poor grades.
One possible idea to alleviate a bad grade is the (heh) statistics. If you have the data on the average grade in your "bad" course, and it is significantly lower than over averages, you might be able to argue that it's not your performance but an especially hard exam or something like that.
Otherwise, I would not "baselessly" blame the lecturers, nobody in the committee knows neither you nor the lecturers, so you are basically badmouthing them without an evidence.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.511407 | 2022-05-29T02:24:33 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/185663",
"authors": [
"Buffy",
"Comic Sans Seraphim",
"Dave L Renfro",
"David A. Craven",
"Dawood ibn Kareem",
"Federico Poloni",
"Kimball",
"Krupip",
"Michael Seifert",
"Oбжорoв",
"PLL",
"ScottishTapWater",
"Stian",
"Tyler",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/118837",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/124869",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1277",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12846",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/142872",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/155987",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/19607",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24278",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/35514",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/49593",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72211",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82449",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84836",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97166",
"seed",
"zlb"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
189784 | Can I publish my thesis online and get paid?
I finished my Ph.D. in mechanical engineering back in 2018. Recently, I found out that my Ph.D. thesis was not published by the university online. It is just in paper form at the university library.
Can I somehow publish my thesis online and get paid royalties for it? If yes, how? I know I have to ask permission to my university, but first I would like to decide what to do.
Please don’t write answers in comments. It bypasses our quality measures by not having voting (both up and down) available on comments, as well as having other problems detailed on meta. Comments are for clarifying and improving the question; please don’t use them for other purposes.
You might be interested: https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/63619/how-much-revenue-do-academic-authors-make-on-their-published-books
It's said that the average number of people who read a dissertation is 1.6, including the author. This is of course a bit facetious, but it's unlikely many people will read it, much less pay to read it.
@NuclearHoagie My thesis has 61 downloads in two years, thank you very much. (I'm pretty sure it counts every time I download it again).
@ThomasMarkov Search engine bots. Even if no one else reads your dissertation, at least Google will.
@ThomasMarkov We have been distributing some software for work in our academic field; aside from our collaborators and their collaborators, from a couple hundred downloads over the years there seemed to be exactly two (2) downloads by researchers elsewhere who have taken interest in it. Download statistics can be very misleading.
About getting paid: A publisher can only pay you if someone else pays them for access to your thesis. That should prompt you to consider who the audience for your thesis is? Who would pay money to read it?
In reality, the market for PhD theses is quite small. Very few of us write about topics of either such importance, or so eloquently, that others are willing to pay for reading our theses.
People may pay indirectly. Many of us sent our theses to ProQuest. ProQuest's dissertation service is then sold as a subscription to libraries. A royalty derived from subscription fees is paid every time somebody at a subscribing institution views your thesis. This is similar to TV streaming services or flat-rate eBook subscriptions. That said, I don't know anybody who's ever gotten a check from ProQuest.
@user71659 That seems like an answer...
@Joe You prompted me to recheck and it appears you're right. I was under the impression that ProQuest requires institutional sponsorship, but it turns out they don't.
@user71659 The realities described by this answer don't change however. Getting a $0.10 check 15 years from now because one curious student accidentally opened your thesis is probably not exactly what the OP had in mind. Nobody is getting rich off a thesis...
I remember getting a $15 royalty check the year after I published my dissertation. I thought this may be good...never received another one...
Most likely no. It is rather the opposite: you might be approached by quite a few publishers that offer to publish your thesis but you will have to pay them and you are most likely not getting anything (at least not financially). Yes, academia is quite an odd field.
"[A]cademia is quite an odd field." True in general, but in this case, most non-academic writers are faced with exactly the same problem: Finding soneone interested in reading your stuff for free is already hard, not to speak of finding someone interested enough to pay real money for it...
This answer misses the point. Publishers could publish your PhD thesis, but they won't make much money from it since very few people are willing to pay for it (see Wolfgang Bangerth's answer), so they won't publish it unless you pay them enough for them to at least break even. It's not an "odd field", it's just market forces at work.
@Heinzi: "Finding someone interested in reading your stuff for free is already hard". It seems to go both ways: finding people interested in sharing (in terms of having a back-and-forth-conversation) is also hard. In general "people-matching" "markets" are very clumsy.
Nothing odd about this. It's just capitalism. Money flows to where the power is. Power accumulates where the money is.
First you need to settle the copyright issue. Who holds it and if it isn't you then what license do you hold from the copyright owner? I doubt that even if a university holds the copyright that they would prevent you publishing your own work. It is more complicated, however, if the work can't be considered a "sole" work due to having been done in a research lab. But settle that first. Part of that is any issues of confidentiality that might arise.
In particular, I would consider a university explicitly monetizing the "sole works" of its students to be very wrong.
Assuming that you have the rights to do it you still have some issues. Publishing "online" is unlikely to result in any monetary payback unless you find a way to put it behind a paywall which has upfront as well as continuing costs. Publishing on arXiv, for example, doesn't pay you anything other than possible "reputation points".
You can, with the appropriate rights, turn it into a book. Some publishers might be interested and would pay royalties, but you will find, almost always, that those disappear within a couple of years.
You can also self-publish a book, perhaps through Amazon.com who provide support for such things. The upfront cost to authors is zero, but it is difficult for potential readers to find such things so the payment you get from the effort will likely be small unless most of the potential readers already know how to find it (and you). If you have an extensive online presence or otherwise high visibility in your field then it might be possible. I've self published textbooks successfully, but literally everyone interested already knew me and how to find my university website. But even that ends after a few years as the needs of the curriculum change.
Note that while a work might be important in a scientific field, the actual audience for it might still be small. The hugely profitable books are more likely to be popularizations of academic work such as those by Carl Sagan, who did real science, but was widely known for his more general explanations which were accessible to non-experts.
To sum it up. It is probably more effort than it is (monetarily) worth. There may be other "paybacks", but in visibility and reputation.
This is a very important point for "sandwich" theses that include published papers verbatim as chapters--you may not own the (whole) copyright!
It's unlikely that you will be able to get your published thesis be paid. There might be a few people who would be willing to pay to read your thesis because many universities and institutes have switched to an open access policy.
If no one else pays for the privilege of reading or critiquing your work, then you should ask yourself who will be interested in seeing what you have to say.
Many dissertations, at least in the United States, are sent to ProQuest, often a requirement of the institution. You can also submit your thesis, even if your institution does not require submission.
ProQuest archives dissertations, makes them searchable, and sells printed copies, microfilm versions, and online PDFs. They also sell subscriptions to many libraries. A royalty is paid when copies are sold, or somebody accesses your dissertation via a subscription.
Their searchable database is useful for accessibility, particularly if your institution does not have some sort of online repository. If you are interested in getting paid however, I have never heard of anybody receiving any money from them because the minimal audience and readership in most theses.
(In fact, when I submitted mine, they hooked me on fancy bound printed versions of my thesis, so I spent more buying copies for myself and my parents then I ever will get in royalties.)
If you are willing to put in the effort, and your dissertation is on an important-enough topic with a large-enough audience, it's possible a publisher will publish it.
Putting in the effort: see this source. You'll need some serious rewriting of your thesis, since it is now aimed at a different audience. Things like an Abstract or an Introduction need to be removed, and the common "this thesis is structured as follows, in chapter 1 we do X, in chapter 2 we do Y" also needs to be reworked.
Important-enough topic with large-enough audience: is your thesis on something trendy? Does it have major practical consequences? Did your thesis lead to patents or new + superior technologies that would not have existed otherwise? One way to tell if the answer is "yes" is if your thesis is generating a lot of views/citations/denials. If you don't know these statistics, you can ask your librarian.
If you are willing to put in the effort and your topic is important enough, then there's a chance a publisher will be willing to publish it. The next step is to approach a publisher with a publication proposal. Here's an example from Springer. You'll need to show why you are qualified to write a book - a PhD alone is not enough to be considered an authority - and why you expect the book to do well (Springer does not explicitly ask for these, but I can virtually guarantee that they'll be evaluating it internally). You can cite the research you did for "important enough topic" above to answer the latter question. You might also be asked for sample chapters. Your university press might be the best place to start, since they are the ones most likely to be willing to take a financial risk by publishing your book.
If the publisher agrees to your proposal, then they'll handle everything else, from drafting a contract to performing typesetting, etc.
It may depend on the institution, but often in order to defend a PhD one has to sign an agreement which settles exactly what you are asking for. Could it be you have done it, and forgot?
Yes, there are books based on PhD theses. They often benefit from additional editing suggested or required by the publisher. Of course releasing such book, or even posting your thesis online requires to follow the agreement with the institution.
tl;dr: You must not restrict access to your thesis.
Public access to research findings is important for the scientific community and for society as a whole. Government-enforced restrictions on copying published works originate in repressive and censorial measures by the British monarchy (read about the Statute of Queen Anne) - and we should not condone them. It is immoral to prevent people from being able to copy your thesis; and - it is detrimental even to your personal interest, of it being widely read, having greater influence, and inspiring others in their research and applied work.
Projects like SciHub (wikipedia.org) and Library Genesis (wikipedia.org) exist for the sole purpose of circumventing such nefarious attempts to limit access to publications only to those who pay. If you publish behind a paywall, your thesis will likely end up in one of these archives. Why not publish it freely to begin with, so that search engines and personal websites can more easily link to it?
Fields differ in what they consider to be the primary "unit" of scholarly output. In computer science conference presentations (e.g., at NeurIPS or a SIG Conference) are highly regarded; biomedicine places much more weight on journal articles instead. A few fields, especially in the humanities, expect academics to write books.
In these fields, it's not uncommon for a dissertation to form the backbone of a person's first book. However, it generally isn't published as-is: one writes a book proposal for potential publishers and revises/expands the text. It is a lot of work and the goal is generally (academic) career advancement rather than the commercial success of the book itself.
Unfortunately, I don't think mechanical engineering is a very book-driven field, but your advisor or thesis committee could probably tell you more. If you're interested in the process, this book is often recommended: https://www.worldcat.org/title/from-dissertation-to-book/oclc/56329536
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.512635 | 2022-10-20T12:42:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/189784",
"authors": [
"Allure",
"Criticize SE actions means ban",
"Heinzi",
"Joe",
"Kevin Kostlan",
"Lodinn",
"Matt",
"Nuclear Hoagie",
"SnakeDoc",
"Thomas Markov",
"cag51",
"gns100",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/110537",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12346",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/123856",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129842",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/145124",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15762",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/21493",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23576",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24304",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/34226",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/51153",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"user3067860",
"user71659"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
191151 | How can I deal with a professor with very weird English?
I have recently enrolled in an elective course from our degree program. There is something that sometimes annoys me, namely the English used by the professor.
He is not a native English speaker, but it is not about his accent or pronunciation. These are decent. The problem is that he keeps applying the grammar rules of his native language to English. Sometimes, things he said in lectures were logically (sometimes, mathematically) nonsensical to everyone. The meaning of what he said was not always what he intended to convey (from a mathematical perspective).
That is also the type of English that we will see in the final exam. I have seen some past exam papers, and there is an inconsistency between the written requirements (in English) and his proposed solutions (mathematical translation of the requirements).
Normally, it is not a big deal for me. However, I occasionally gave him some suggestions in a very polite way instead of accusing him of using incorrect grammar, so it will be easier for students to understand during the lectures (and also during the exam). He always responded with something like "well, it is natural to use this in real life" and suggested that I should familiarize myself with his English instead. It disappointed me.
I want to take the matter further in a polite way (is it even a wise thing to do?). What should I do in this situation?
PS: I feel bad for asking this question as I quite enjoy his lectures
Update: We have reached a temporary solution with the professor. We will try to learn his English (through past exams), but he will also need to explain his "terminology" in detail. During the exam, we can ask him questions if there is anything ambiguous. It is something that we have to deal with.
Has he requested your feedback? And is his speech honestly incomprehensible, or just quirky? If ‘no’ to both, do not take the matter further.
"I feel bad for asking this question" No need to feel bad about being unhappy with your professor's unclear style of communication.
"I should familiarize myself with his English instead". You just reminded me of Mr. Brown (Mind Your Language) when he taught the Arab Sheikh how to understand Scottish Gaelic instead of teaching his Scottish chauffeur English.
It seems difficult to me to offer advice without an example of the sort of grammar that would make something logically nonsense. Language is often implicit among native speakers: that is, background information is needed to understand the logical meaning of almost every sentence in English. I certainly understand if you don't want to provide a specific example, but maybe you can construct a new one that follows the same pattern.
This method would have to be used judiciously, but if he states something using language that is confusing (and you think is due to his non-native English based grammar), ask a question where you state it back with correct grammar. E.g. "In that last statement did you mean X Y Z?". You might get a grumpy "Yes. That is what I said." and the best you'll be able to respond is "Ah, sorry, it wasn't clear to me, and it sounded like maybe you meant Z Y X. Thank you for the clarification." Won't help on exams, and probably won't lead to him realizing the confusion he's causing, but might help a bit.
Interestingly, there was a recent post on Linguistics.SE concerning applying the grammar of one language to another. According to the top answer on that post, this behavior is called interference.
Which country??
@BryanKrause I imagine it's probably more on word usage. Like, "There are upwards 5 potatoes in my shopping bag. Each potato is worth $1.00. How many more should I buy to get a bag of potatoes worth $10?"
@BryanKrause It is indeed too specific to include in my post, yet I cannot think of an equivalent example, but it involves "mathematical logic". There were some occasions when our solutions were significantly different from his just because he used phrases having totally different meaning from what he intended to say. That was why I complained. Otherwise, I would not.
I have had this problem with the supervisor on my Master's thesis. They were from a German-speaking country and spoke extremely strange English, all I can say is that I feel your pain. The only thing that helped is that I have studied German before so that I knew what they meant when they made strange verb choices, it might help if you know some of that person's native language, so you know what they mean when they try to speak English.
One time I had a Romanian linguistics professor who always said "Let's discuss about this." One day I wrote her a small note saying, "One says: 'Let's discuss X' or 'Let's have a discussion about X,' but not 'Let's discuss about X.' " The next day, early in the lesson, she said very pointedly, "Now let's discuss it. Yes, let's have a discussion about it." She then smiled, shook her head knowingly at how wrong it sounded to her, and went on asking us to "discuss about" things from then on. :/
Which course are you taking? If it's undergrad, there should be a book or online notes on the course that has clear definitions. You could maybe advise to your teacher to use a book or notes to prepare the classes or at least the definitions and problems so everything is clear.
Considering that
He is not a native English speaker, but it is not about his accent or pronunciation. These are decent.
the problem is not with understanding his pronunciation, but that
Sometimes, things he said in lectures were logically (sometimes, mathematically) nonsensical to everyone. The meaning of what he said was not always what he intended to convey (from a mathematical perspective).
So the information he conveys is confusing and hard to, conceptually, understand. Since you also mention that
That is also the type of English that we will see in the final exam. I have seen some past exam papers, and there is an inconsistency between the written requirements (in English) and his proposed solutions (mathematical translation of the requirements).
it seems that the communication issues also happen in writing. Now, if the issue with wording in assignments (or even in class) is recurrent and several students agree with your take on it, then it might be worth letting the professor know that you all are having a hard time understanding, without telling him what to do. Simple questions by a few students during class such as "could you explain that again, I'm not quite following?" or "are we supposed to do X or Y in the assignment?" will help you all conceptually understand what he is trying to convey at the same time that no one ".. [gives] him some suggestions ..." and be perceived as nit-picking his phrasing.
Academia is an international environment, so part of the skills you will learn is dealing with people who speak another language than you do. Remember that you are extremely privileged: you can speak your own native language and expect others to understand you. All you have to deal with is other people not speaking your own language perfectly. Most people around the world have to deal with speaking English as foreign language to other people who also speak English as a foreign language, and try to make sense of the resulting chaos...
So I would just treat this as an exercise of an important skill you will have to have in your later life, and be thankful that the trouble you have is a lot less than the trouble other people around the world have.
In academia, you can and should expect others to speak English the same way you expect them to be able to read and use the Internet. Your answer does not, in my opinion, apply. If they are hired to teach in an English-speaking environment, they are required to speak English on a level adequate to the setting.
Your answer assumes that the OP's first language is English. Based on the information we have, I'm not sure if that's truly a valid assumption.
First year students complain they can't understand an Indian instructor's odd grammar. 3rd years have forgotten it was ever a problem and feel sorry for classmates who have never had an Indian instructor.
Odd grammar is one thing, and we should just live with it, but when mathematical precision is important the professor must be able to speak with precision.
Absolutely terrible answer. Clear communication is of great importance in a teaching environment, especially for mathematics.
I've witnessed this problem in mathematics before. It's not necessarily the math part, because you can write language-neutral equations down and get by with a few simple words (integrate, solve). The issue happens when they're trying to explain, say, physics behind the equations, or in the OP's case word problems. They can be successful in 90% of the teaching, but it falls apart in a critical 10%.
Being able to understand weird English is a skill, but the classroom is not the place to learn it, and a maths examination is not the place to test it. It is OK to not be able
to understand a talk at a conference, but not losing points in a test because a question was unclear.
This might be correct if you're answering the question in the title without looking at the details in the question body. But in the question body OP explains that it's not just accent or pronunciation, but about the precision of the meaning where precision is required, such as in mathematical exam.
@user253751 The instructor is probably speaking in the most common mathematically precise way, but the OP just doesn't know that. Even if they somehow know something is being said in a different way, that's a thing in math -- multiple terms for something, or even terms which can mean different things depending on context.
Find support. Surely you are not the only student in your class with this problem. A request coming from many students has more leverage than one from a single person.
Make practical suggestions. For instance, suggest that he gets the final tests reviewed by a colleague for grammar before giving it to you.
Be polite. Phrase it as something like "Sometimes we have a hard time understanding the requirements", not "your English is weird". And, since you enjoy his lectures, start with a positive word.
If this second attempt fails, escalate the matter: get student union reps involved if you can, and speak to the head of studies.
All good points. However, #2 really shouldn't be necessary for a student to suggest. All exams should be subject to mandatory review before being taken. The main point of this is to catch technical errors, but it will also flag language issues.
@EspeciallyLime A review is not mandatory everywhere. And, even if there was one, it certainly was not effective in the past finals, so the process needs adjusting. The reviewer could be someone with an even worse command of English, or may have chosen not to focus on the grammar.
#1 is a good advice. I have not tried it as I normally talk to him privately.
@FedericoPoloni Yes, evidently it isn't mandatory everywhere - I was simply saying that it should be, as a matter of good practice. This was not meant as a criticism of your good answer, but of the institution in question.
Actually, I think #2 is excellent advice if you can make it happen.
@EspeciallyLime Just curious, where are exams subject to mandatory review?
@AzorAhai-him- it has been the case in universities I have worked at in the UK. I got the impression it was completely standard here.
@EspeciallyLime Good to know.
Like Federico Poloni wrote in their answer, getting more students behind the cause will make it much stronger.
You have attempted to improve their lectures, but failed. Speaking correctly is very hard since you have think about the subject matter and language at the same time. They are not willing to make that effort.
Give up on that and concentrate on what is important:
The Exam
The exam should be clear, unambiguous and correct.
If you have examples from previous exams that have failed any of these goals, that is where you should take the fight. Be very concrete: "This sentence states X, but according to the suggested solution, you actually meant Y."
Make clear that students can actual fail because of the professors incorrect language.
Writing correctly is easier than speaking, since they can first think about the content and then go over a second time and look at the language.
You should suggest that they consult a native speaker to help them.
The exam is very important and should be worth the extra effort.
I am afraid you might have to take this fight twice. First before the exam. Then, when they haven't listened, repeat the fight so that people don't get bad grades because they misunderstood the questions.
After all that, warn the next year students they might have to repeat the fight.
I occasionally gave him some suggestions in a very polite way
So you have already tried offering him unsolicited advice...
He always responsed with something like "well, it is nature to use this in real life" and suggested me to familiarize myself with his English instead
and he responded poorly.
It disappointed me.
Yes, this is disappointing; you would expect that anyone speaking a foreign language would be pleased to get feedback from native speakers. Still, it is not really your role to provide this feedback, and he has made it clear that he is not open to receiving it. So, you should not broach the subject again unless you are invited to (e.g., in an end-of-course evaluation).
Although the feedback was unasked for, since "... some past exam papers, and there is an inconsistency between the written requirements (in English) and his proposed solutions (mathematical translation of the requirements)" the communication issue can and will affect the grades, and affect the overall quality of the class too. If the question was "instructor uses unconventional and inconsistent notation that stops us from correctly comprehending lectures and solving assignments" would you still say that unsolicited feedback from students should be avoided?
Yes, actually. It sounds like OP has already tried offering feedback more than once with negative results. In really serious cases, you could try to insist, or escalate the issue, but that does not seem to be the case here.
I agree with the gist of your answer (do not broach the subject again). But I don't think that we can know from the question that the OP is a native speaker. If not, it would be one learner offering unsolicited advice to another learner. That's much more sensitive and potentially face-threatening than an interaction between a native speaker and a learner.
@Schmuddi OP's profile says they are from Adelaide, an English-speaking city, but the language of OP's original post makes me wonder whether English is perhaps OP's 2nd, 3rd, etc. language, e.g. "using wrong grammars" and "He always responsed" and "suggested me to"
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.513738 | 2022-12-01T02:21:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/191151",
"authors": [
"Adam Přenosil",
"Azor Ahai -him-",
"Bryan Krause",
"Buffy",
"Criticize SE actions means ban",
"Eric",
"Especially Lime",
"Federico Poloni",
"Jonatan Garcia",
"JonathanZ",
"Luke Sawczak",
"MrVocabulary",
"Neuchâtel",
"Nik",
"Owen Reynolds",
"Schmuddi",
"Taladris",
"Tom",
"Yacine",
"acvill",
"cag51",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111468",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111891",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/116976",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/117407",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/122238",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/129972",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14938",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15528",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/157609",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/165363",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/23576",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24431",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37441",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/37825",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43873",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53507",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/68772",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70958",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/71111",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/74638",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/92334",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/93303",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958",
"jDAQ",
"justhalf",
"shoover",
"user71659",
"user76284"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
8519 | Are mathematics REUs absolutely limited to undergraduates?
I had an amazing time at my REU (Research Experiences for Undergraduates) last summer. I would really love to do another one this year.
Problem is, I am about to graduate, so I will technically not be an undergraduate this summer. I do intend to continue my education in graduate school in the Fall, and have been admitted somewhere.
I've been told that I should just kick back and relax this summer so that I'm fully unwound for grad school, but I don't have any money to travel, all my friends will have left for their grad school already, and there's really nothing that would stress me out more than sitting around and doing nothing for three months. I love to travel, make new friends, and learn cool stuff, so I think doing another REU would actually be the perfect way for me to unwind.
At my last REU, we had a student who had graduated that year and was about to go into a Master's program. It was rumored that she had omitted/lied about this on her application and the admissions people just didn't look into it carefully. I don't know if this is true, though. It seems possible that the program staff simply felt her application was strong enough to warrant making an exception - after all, she wasn't going to grad school yet.
Is it possible to be admitted to a mathematics REU the summer between undergrad and graduate school?
If not, would offering to go without pay (for only room and board) make any difference? What about REUs in physics, or compsci, or other sciences which might want somebody with a math background?
Why not write to the REUs you would like to apply to and ask them? (It's best to check their web sites first - for example, http://www.d.umn.edu/~jgallian/inst.html says Duluth will not admit students in your position.) I suspect most will not, but policies might differ between sites, so looking into each case individually is the only way to know for sure.
Incidentally, I think this is largely a funding issue. The NSF funds REUs partly to help students decide whether to go to grad school, and from that perspective there's no point to admitting a student who is already going to grad school. I don't know whether NSF forbids admitting such students, or just discourages it, but even if they forbid it some REUs may also have alternative sources of funding.
(Actually, on second reading the Duluth link I gave above does not say you cannot be admitted, just that you cannot receive a stipend. It's hard to know how carefully it is meant to be read, but it suggests that perhaps the "go without pay" option might help there.)
I think I've seen (but am too lazy to find) REUs (probably physics) that would accept people at your stage, sans the 'already accepted' part. As others have noted, that kind of runs counter to the point of REUs. I agree with the other ideas posted - offer to go without pay, or look for other gap programs (research or otherwise). If you like travel but have no money, you might look into volunteer programs (possibly having nothing to do with your field of study).
I quote from the NSF REU guideline (emphasis mine):
Eligible Student Participants: Undergraduate student participants
supported with NSF funds in either REU Supplements or REU Sites must
be U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, or permanent residents of the United
States. An undergraduate student is a student who is enrolled in a
degree program (part-time or full-time) leading to a baccalaureate or
associate degree. Students who are transferring from one college or
university to another and are enrolled at neither institution during
the intervening summer may participate. High school graduates who have
been accepted at an undergraduate institution but who have not yet
started their undergraduate study are also eligible to participate.
Students who have received their bachelor's degrees and are no longer
enrolled as undergraduates are generally not eligible to participate.
For REU Sites, a significant fraction of the student participants
should come from outside the host institution or organization. Some
NSF directorates encourage inclusion in the REU program of K-12
teachers of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Please
contact the appropriate disciplinary program officer for guidance.
Within the framework of the basic eligibility guidelines outlined
here, most REU Sites and Supplements further define recruitment and
selection criteria, based on the nature of the particular research and
other factors.
So this means that (a) your host will not be able to receive funding for you from the NSF if s/he accepts you into the program (b) on the other hand if you and/or the PI of the grant is able to secure funding otherwise, there's generally no rule saying that a student in your position cannot be involved in research in some way.
You will need to individually contact the REUs you are interested to find out whether they'd be willing to grant you the leeway.
There do exist programs for this period of time (between undergraduate and graduate programs). The ones that comes to mind are EDGE (which you can see on their webpage is limited to women) and the PCMI summer school. I believe there are others, as Henry points out one should google 'summer school' instead of 'REU' to get at them.
REUs are almost all a specific NSF program which, as Willie points out, generally doesn't allow students in your situation.
However the programs called "summer schools" (not to be confused with credit bearing courses offered by universities in the summer) often do allow graduate students (and some have graduate students as their main target).
You could consider doing an internship (for statistics openings, see http://www.amstat.org/education/internships.cfm), although doing this mid-March is jumping on a train that had left the station, judging by the deadlines. You also need to have something more applied in your resume than pure math to be of interest to industry folks, too.
Not all REUs allow graduating undergraduates, but some do. I know for a fact that the RIPS programs (both the ones in UCLA and Hong Kong) do. I personally did the REU in Hong Kong after my senior year and it was an amazing experience.
Note that this is an exception since the REU funding isn't directly REU funding but through the math institute IPAM, so maybe there are similar practices at other math institutes such as the REU in Minnesota run by IMA, though I am not certain because I do not have personal experience with the others.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.514906 | 2013-03-11T04:19:40 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8519",
"authors": [
"Aimee Stubbs",
"Akash_akki",
"Andrew Kurau",
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Bill",
"Dan",
"Vallar Hall",
"farnsy",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/190514",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20588",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20590",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20591",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20622",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20623",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20639",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7055",
"hunter2",
"sgauria"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
94780 | How to handle severe illness in promotion and tenure reports?
I have been suffering from a chronic, progressive disease the last few years, but during this past spring semester, it advanced much more rapidly, leading to massive declines in both my physical and emotional health. My teaching evaluations suffered, since I was just not in a place to spend much time working on prepping for lectures, and the changes I had hoped to incorporate didn't work as planned.
What's the best way to go about making sure this information is properly documented, so it has as minimal an impact as possible on my promotion and tenure cases? We do an annual review, and I have already been in communication with my chair and dean, who are aware of my situation.
What country is this? How are disability accommodations usually handled? I'm going to add a tag for "disability" since the issues are similar for any disability which interferes with productivity.
How this should be handled can depend a great deal of your university's local policies. In my department, a colleague broke both her legs and was confined to a wheelchair for over a year. It cost her heavily, and she was denied tenure. Literally the day after her employment ended, the university announced a new policy to stop the tenure clock and provide accommodations for tenure-track faculty who had experienced serious medical or family problems.
@Buzz Wow. That is really unfortunate and illustrates why this kind of issue need to be handled through formal channels. Depending on the country, what happened to your colleague might be illegal.
I'm sorry to hear this. I think you should talk with your department chair/dean immediately, both to document your situation (if only informally) and to learn if there is any mechanism for medical leave or similar accommodation. Sadly, policies differ wildly even within the same country (or at least in the US).
@JeffE Policies might differ, but refusing reasonable accommodation is illegal discrimination in the US, and I believe it is illegal in the EU. The OP seems to have already spoken informally to the chair and the dean, so s/he should probably get legal advice if s/he can't get some kind of written assurance from them or a clear answer about how to document the disability.
@ElizabethHenning: This is in the US; I've added the tag.
@JeffE: I've been keeping them in the loop, as the situation is still evolving.
There are organizations such as Chronically Academic and AHEAD that can help you. Google them. Also, check your AAUP chapter for suggestions.
(I'm very sorry for your troubles...)
To supplement other comments and answers:
In my experience (at R1 places in the U.S.), while mostly undergrads' and grad students' (broadly speaking) "disability issues" have a roughly appropriate procedure in place, just as an illustrative and ominous example, this does not seem to extend to grad students who've (e.g.) had their leg broken in a car accident through no fault of their own. That is, one of my students had this happen, could not do TA (teaching assistant) duties, and had to petition for "leave of absence" and was supposedly not allowed to be on campus, use the library, etc., but was allowed to (!) petition to return. This policy was beyond the power of my department to alter. I was told that the university is "more caring" about faculty in similar situations... presumably because they've invested more in them. But, my point is, I would be very suspicious and untrusting.
E.g., it might happen (given my observations) that dept head and lower-level deans are sympathetic, supportive, and quasi-promise that they'll accommodate... but then eventually discover that "university policy" prevents them from doing what they promised they'd do. E.g., even a signed document from them may easily (!) be countermanded by higher-ups, claiming that they did not have the authority to make the promises they made.
Yes, talk to the disabilities office. The "Americans with Disabilities Act" has not yet been scrapped (fingers crossed), and U.S. (especially public, in the U.S. as opposed to U.K. sense) have considerable power to set accommodations. Yes, they attempt to "negotiate" with relevant work-place authorities, but the rough idea is that you cannot be fired or marginalized for (new or old) disabilities. Having things in place with the Disabilities Office may be your best "insurance" against higher-ups' disavowing your departments' agreements with you, since they cannot so effortlessly over-ride them. I'd absolutely do this.
And, above all, no "accommodation" should include your losing your health insurance just because you have some periods when you can't teach classes!!! Obviously, in the U.S., anything like that is very, very dangerous for people who are not Magically/Luckily Healthy. The reason I mention such a thing is that my student, mentioned above, did lose health insurance exactly due to the broken leg that made him unable to TA... Luckily, I believe his partner's employment covered him. A bit too unfunny, non-recreational Kafka-esque for my taste.
(Again, very sorry about your increasing troubles, and best hopes for no additional troubles due to bad bureaucracy...)
Thankfully, our university is surprisingly progressive on healthcare. Even if you're on full leave, you can maintain your insurance by continuing to pay the regular premiums. Also, we've gone pretty high up the ladder communicating with the administration, so it should be clear what's going to be allowed.
My advice is that you decide exactly what you feel would be an appropriate accommodation and then check with whatever office handles disability issues for faculty about how to document that accommodation. Unfortunately, many US universities are still behind the curve in accommodating faculty with disabilities, so you may need to be persistent.
Do not "negotiate" with the dean or the chair about this because compromising about your accommodations can be used against you later. I'm not saying that you should be adversarial about it, but any power you have here is now, while they are being cooperative. As Buzz's comment above shows, if you don't get this written in stone now, it will be too late after review.
We've already spoken about stopping the clock if I need advanced treatment (which I almost certainly will), but I will definitely make sure everything is written out. However, some things are still being worked out as we go along—as you said, they're not quite up to speed when it comes to faculty.
@aeismail As far as P&T goes, there should be no reason they need to see any medical documentation. That should be handled by the disability office, which might provide an accommodation such as excluding your Spring 2017 teaching evaluations from consideration. That's all the P&T committee needs to know.
Inagree with @ElizabethHenning. I have seen successful promotion cases where the applicant clearly had extra time on their clock. When members of the P&T committee asked why the tenure clock had been delayed, the chair told us the delay was irrelevant to the case (as per university policy), and the reasons were none of our business.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.515551 | 2017-08-20T10:55:10 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/94780",
"authors": [
"Buzz",
"Elizabeth Henning",
"JeffE",
"RoboKaren",
"aeismail",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14885",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/27515",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/53",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/65",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/77539"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
188578 | How much does being denied tenure damage your career?
I had this conversation with a friend recently (who's a tenure-track professor). He says although he's currently in a well-paid, highly desirable job, he is skeptical about his future because he's got to pass his tenure review. If he fails that, then the university effectively slaps a "not good enough" sign on top of his head that makes him unemployable both to other universities and in industry.
I suspect he's exaggerating a bit (since people who are denied tenure can't just disappear, they must be able to find employment somewhere else), but still:
How much damage is it to your career if you are denied tenure?
How does one explain being denied tenure to a future employer? (Both in academia and industry)
There is a delicate issue of causality that makes your question tricky to give a convincing answer to (even assuming the basic premise has some truth to it, which I am not at all sure is the case). If someone hypothetically was denied tenure and then found themselves unemployable, are they unemployable because they were denied tenure, or are they unemployable because they aren’t very good at what they do, which is also why they were denied tenure? How does one establish that it was the denial of tenure that was the root cause of the unemployability?
One important point: how would other people know that someone was denied tenure? Is it a public informartion, and in which country?
What happened to my comment responding to Dilworth? Presumably the interviewer will ask "why are you leaving your current job?" and one would have to say that one was denied tenure.
Has he considered lying and just saying he didn't fancy staying at that institution or he wanted to move to a new city?
@Allure, for some mysterious reason my reply has disappeared as well. So I repeat it: When asked about his motivation of leaving, the candidate can simply not reveal the truth, as is very common.
I am (really, really) shocked some people are seriously suggesting being dishonest. I might ask that as a follow-up question sometime.
"makes him unemployable both to other universities and in industry": I highly disagree. Industry standards are not comparable to university ones. I remember a funny quote: What happens to someone who fails an academic career? He/she ends up with an industrial job with 3x the salary.
Totally---I was also shocked when I discovered, around junior high school, or before, that some people say things that are not the truth. And I am (really, really) shocked that you didn't know that!
@Allure: Today information is widely available. You will be asked about previous experience at an interview. Lying on an interview is not the best thing. However, in industry, what you can do is often more valuable than a long CV. If you prove you can do the job, then losing tenure is not a problem.
It depends on why and it depends on where. Being denied tenure for misconduct can be a career killer if it is known, of course. But being denied tenure from a very highly rated place might have little effect except at similar places.
There are some places where it is very difficult to achieve tenure and a much smaller fraction of early career academics make the grade. But those are places where the standards are very high. I once heard a (perhaps apocryphal) story of a place that never tenured anyone, but thought of themselves a a sort of training ground for academics at other institution.
In general, standards for tenure vary and it should be obvious that it will be harder at those places that have a lot of distinguished researchers (and/or teachers). There are even liberal arts colleges in US with such high standards.
So, no, it isn't a block in itself, provided that you meet the standards at the place you are next hired. But you have to produce. There aren't many free rides.
I'll also note that it is possible to be denied tenure for "political" reasons in a dysfunctional department. That has its own problems going forward.
It is even possible to fail to earn tenure for financial reasons. A university suffering a funding crisis, perhaps.
As for how to explain it, you may not need to if your new target is appropriate and the place you didn't earn it was much higher ranked. You will need to explain things like your teaching philosophy and research arc, but that is true anyway.
But, if you don't, then people will make assumptions, which may be fine or not. If your publication and other academic record is appropriate for the new place then there shouldn't be much of an issue.
If you decide to explain it, avoid overly negative words (failed to earn..., denied...) for some more neutral terminology assuming that is appropriate. Perhaps you were told why: "needed more publications", say.
+1, Especially for the addition.
Nice answer. It is also possible to be "denied tenure" without anyone knowing it in some places.
I was told that at Yale in some departments, only 20% or so of assistant professors end up getting tenure. I suspect that most of them successfully land jobs at other universities and get tenure there soon after.
The premise of education is that it is possible to be at a point where you are not sufficiently accomplished to jump some hurdle at the present time, but you can train more and become more accomplished to jump that hurdle at a later time. One would certainly hope that academics of all people understand this, and do not write a person off for the future merely because they fail to clear some professional hurdle at a particular time. People generally get better at their work with more experience, so being denied tenure certainly shouldn't adversely affect your career, beyond the fact that it is the absence of a promotion at the present time.
Now, having said this, certain universities adopt an "up or out" policy** with regard to tenure track positions and even sometimes in other contract positions. Moreover, there does seems to be an attitude amongst some senior academics that is quite impatient towards academic progression, and this augments formal "up or out" policies. For example, some academics on hiring committees seem to prefer younger applicants with less track-record over older academics with an existing track-record but who they perceive to be "behind" an expected schedule of progression, even if they're far more accomplished than younger academics. Having observed this kind of attitude, it is not unthinkable that being denied tenure might have an adverse effect beyond mere lack of a promotion. It would be a huge exaggeration to say that this makes a person unemployable, but it is possible that some senior academics might view them adversely, under this impatient viewpoint. I think this is quite a perverse way to run a profession, but it does seem that some senior academics adopt this kind of view. I agree with you that your friend's view is an exaggeration, but it's not completely baseless.
I'm not sure there is any need to "explain" being denied tenure. In academia people understand that tenure requirements are difficult, and they also require that academics follow a very specific pathway. The absence of meeting those requirements is not something mysterious that would require any explanation. Hiring committees in academia look directly at your publication record, grant record, and other direct measures, so they have the ability to directly assess the kinds of things that a tenure committee would consider. (Ironically, a hiring committee would probably only ask for an explanation of why you were denied tenure if your record is really good with respect to the measures usually used in tenure decisions, in which case they might worry that there is some unobservable reason for denial.) In most industrial jobs, most of the managers hiring people barely have a clue how academic tenure works (some don't even know that the concept exists) so an explanation is highly unlikely to be needed.
** An "up or out" policy for a tenure-track position means that if the academic is not granted tenure at the end of the review period then their position ends. In many cases there is a limited grace period (e.g., one year) where the academic retains their job temorarily while they look for a new position. The "up or out" employment arrangement is common in some countries, such as the US.
The OP didn't specify a country, but formal "up or out" policies are almost universal for tenure-track positions at American universities.
Clarification needed I think: (1) what is "up or out" policy? (2) and what is the meaning of "an attitude [...] that is quite impatient towards academic progression"? [my emph]? What does it mean to be "impatient" here?
@Dilworth An "up or out" policy, in this context, means that if you are not granted tenure by the end of some fixed period, then your job ends. (Again in the US, typically you get one more year after being denied tenure during which you can apply for other jobs.)
And what is "impatient towards academic progression"?
I've added an example of this to make it clearer.
Thank you! -----------
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.516391 | 2022-09-10T05:18:24 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/188578",
"authors": [
"Allure",
"Ben",
"Beni Bogosel",
"Dan Romik",
"Dilworth",
"Mark Meckes",
"Peter K.",
"ScottishTapWater",
"Wolfgang Bangerth",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/101",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/31149",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/3965",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/42041",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/72211",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8760"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
145548 | COVID-19 - how do I navigate this situation with my advisor?
I am a Master's student in epidemiology. It's an insane time in our field right now. Of course, I find what's going on fascinating (that's why I am in this field), but extremely stressful as well.
I have 2 advisors. My primary advisor is not working on COVID-19 related stuff. So, although she's really busy trying to re-plan all of her classes to be remote and just reorganize everything, she is not responding directly to the outbreak. My co-advisor, however, is on the response team for the outbreak in my country. Basically, she is working with the government to create models to predict the trajectory of the disease. I had a meeting with her 1.5 weeks ago and she said basically all she has on her mind is COVID-19. That was before the world went into quarantine so I imagine things have become even busier for her.
My primary advisor sent me an email today talking about how to move forward and in the email she mentioned that it does depend on how busy my co-advisor is (but also assured me we would figure this all out).
Unfortunately, the project I am working on now is a modelling project and my primary advisor isn't a modeller, so it's my co-advisor that needs to move the project forward. I still have other things to do for my thesis, but I am almost done those other things and I am just in the editing stages. I have a lot more to do on my modelling project, but my co-advisor is extremely busy right now. I am finished what she asked me to do a couple of weeks ago and want to send it to her.
Sorry for the long post explaining my situation. My question is, should I send her the things the I have finished or would that be a bit tone-deaf? What should I even say in the email? I don't want to come off as not caring about the biggest health crisis in at least a decade while asking her to review something that's not even related to COVID-19. How should I even frame the email or should I hold off from sending her things for a few weeks?
If it makes a difference, although I do have an office, I can do 100% of my work remotely (and do usually work from home at least 3 days a week).
You note, it's my co-advisor that needs to move the project forward, but surely it's you that needs to move forwards, especially as your thesis is nearly complete. Your co-advisor is on the response team for the outbreak in my country, which can be their only priority. If you cannot move forwards without them, then maybe ask your department to find a solution, e.g., find you a third advisor.
She tells me what to do next. For this project, I do small steps at a time. I work on creating something for a couple weeks, show it to her, and then she tells me what I should look at as next steps. After I finish that, she tells me additional steps.
At the masters level, it should be fine for you to drive your thesis forward yourself. You could come up with next steps on your own, and then send your thesis advisor your current batch of results and describe what you are going to do next. Say you understand she is busy with the response and you just wanted to keep her looped in. When you are interviewing for jobs, this will be a great story to provide evidence of independence and self-direction.
As someone who's been out of academia for a while, I would like to offer a different perspective. Yes, occupying your co-advisor's attention when the roof is on fire is tone-deaf. However: you have acquired skills that are obviously in high demand these days, and are thrown into a (hopefully) once-in-a lifetime situation to apply these skills. Especially since you're not on a strict deadline with your thesis, there are now more important things than finishing the thesis at the scheduled time. See this as an opportunity, not an obstacle.
Check if this is okay with your primary advisor, then send a mail to your co-advisor saying that you would be glad to put your thesis on ice and help her with her COVID work if she has anything you could be of help with. If you are a capable student, she probably will.
Then, when things have calmed down, reevaluate the situation, see what you have learned in the meantime, and continue from there.
+100 for “once in a lifetime situation”. It truly is a unique opportunity for OP to do cutting edge science that benefits humanity.
I'd add that from a selfish perspective, COVID-19 papers are likely going to get a fast track and a ton of citations right now. If you can help out your co-adviser, it will likely be good for your career as well as helping the world.
I agree with this in total. I would send an email to update her on your status, ask for feedback explicitly saying you understand if it will not be a timely feedback, and then offer your help with sharing some work, this last only if it is in your interest (and it would really benefit you, so it should really be).
Yes, it’s fine to email her, but the email should be a lot shorter than your post here. Keep it to an absolute minimum and spare your poor overworked co-adviser having to read any unnecessary apologies, hand-wringing, expressions of sympathy and whatnot.
Something like this might work:
Dear co-adviser,
I’m following up on our meeting from last week. As you remember, I need some input from you on Project X. Specifically:
A (by March 29 if at all possible)
B (deadline April 21)
C (anytime before mid-May)
See attached documents.
I understand you are extremely busy with COVID-19 related matters. If you think you cannot help with this, could you please at least reply with a quick acknowledgement and/or suggest some other people or resources I could use to be able to complete the project? I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks,
aspire94
That's close to perfect. Maybe add an 'if I don't hear from you I'll be doing X' type of comment?
...and if OP is willing/interested, an offer to help with the COVID-19 work.
-1 because while the suggested email would work well in most situations, this is not a normal situation. The professor is literally working round the clock to save lives. This is no time to ask for "acknowledgment" or suggestions. You either help the firefighting or step out of the way. The thesis can wait.
@Sam thanks for the comment. We don’t know that the co-adviser is “literally working round the clock to save lives”, that’s your own interpretation. What we were told is that “she is working with the government to create models to predict the trajectory of the disease”. I’m guessing she still has time to eat, read the news, and do other mundane things, including attend to a few non-COVID-19-related work matters here and there. The situation is certainly not normal, but there isn’t anything offensive about the email. And if she truly doesn’t have time to read or answer it, obviously she won’t.
+1. I am not a native English speaker so I may be wrong, but "See attachments" sound imperative to me. I would recommend to set up some cloud service (Dropbox,...) or a github repository and write something like "I will put [work] in [service]. When the situation is back to normal, you can use it to check my progress."
@Taladris well, technically speaking it does use the imperative tense if that’s what you mean. But it’s a standard way of expressing things in English and not offensive in any way. (Apparently some cultures may be sensitive to this sort of thing though - reminds me of this question.)
@Taladris thanks for the +1 in any case!
I don't see any harm in sending this co-adviser the work you've completed, provided you include a cover message saying that you're aware how busy she is with the high-priority work on the COVID-19 epidemic but you'd really appreciate it if she could find time to suggest what you should do next.
That was assuming that, when you wrote "she tells me what to do next", you meant that you really have no idea what to do next without being told. If, on the other hand, you do have an idea, you might mention it in your cover message. Something like "Might it be reasonable to look into X next?" could make it easier for her to either just say yes or suggest an alternative.
By the way, although things may be very different in your field, my experience has been that the students who always need to be told exactly what to do tend to be the weaker students. You (and in particular your letters of recommendation) might benefit if you can produce, on your own, some ideas about how to continue.
I wouldn't call myself a weak student... I am actually one of the stronger students in the program. It depends on which project I am working on. My first project (which I am in the editing stages of now), I did that very independently. I had guidance at the beginning to set the project up, and of course I had questions during my weekly meetings, but in general I always knew what to do next. That was the project where my primary advisor was in charge of. My co-advisor just does things a bit differently. That being said, I could definitely suggest something to look into next. That's a good idea
I would +1 except for the last paragraph. It's not exactly false, but what it seems to insinuate is that the OP is a weak student, and that doesn't seem fair here.
@aspire94 I'm glad you did an earlier project very independently. That's what I was hoping would happen when I wrote the last part of my answer, and it's good that it had already happened. Encourage your first adviser to mention your independence in the letter of recommendation.
I actually think the last (third) paragraph is an important piece of information, and thoughtfully delivered.
The third paragraph is poorly considered because it gives causative weight where it isn't warranted. If you are a strong student and you come up with independent ideas, that's great and people will take notice. If you are any kind of student and you let your advisor come up with ideas, that's probably fine. If you are a weak student and you come up with independent ideas, you're sunk. Going your own way is not going to make you strong if you're not already; it merely highlights your existing strength.
I think the last paragraph is not true. I had a lot of weak students who showed a lot of initiative -- but in the wrong ways..
Can you adapt your model to deal with the problem that is interesting everyone else? You don't have to come up with a magical solution to modeling the COVID outbreak, just use your knowledge to say something interesting and relevant. Help your co-advisor with the collection and synthesis of data, do your bit of modeling and write it all up. The level of interest in the topic will out-weigh the downsides of having to change tack at this late stage of your studies.
You need to discuss this (or any other option) with your primary advisor first.
Keep the material you have already completed, and try to discuss it with your co-advisor in if and when the COVID outbreak is under control.
I can't really do that. My second project (current one) has to be somewhat related to my first one. And my first one is completely unrelated to COVID or even viruses (I am looking at a bacteria). My model cannot be adapted to COVID. It just won't work, what I am studying and COVID are completely different things. I have contacted my primary advisor who is asking what my other advisor is doing with regards to student feedback
OK, I can see that the idea of adapting your model was misplaced. Offering to help out with managing data might still be a good move ... though I don't know how this works in your field. Otherwise, I support the suggestions above that a polite email would be worthwhile.
@aspire94 All disease modeling projects are "somewhat related" - if there's an option to help with the modeling that your coadvisor is doing, you might do something of immediate practical use, and get coauthorship on a decent paper that's relevant right now, which iwould IMHO just as (or even more) useful for a final thesis than another bacteria-related modeling project.
@Peteris My first project is not a disease modelling project, so the topics have to be related. In this department, your topics need to be related. So if my results from my first project showed something, I have to somehow implement those findings into my second project. We can't do 2 completely distinct modelling projects. But I will ask my advisor if there is anything I can help with, and hopefully there is something (because I do really want to work on COVID-19)
I would go with
Dear Co-Advisor,
last week we agreed on ...
Of course, all our previous plans are now obsolete.
Please let me know if I can be of any help.
If not, as I want to continue my work withouth putting any burden on you,
I appreciate if you point me towards someone I could get in touch with.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.517128 | 2020-03-18T15:16:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/145548",
"authors": [
"Andreas Blass",
"Barker",
"Caleb Stanford",
"Dan Romik",
"Daniel R. Collins",
"M Juckes",
"Peteris",
"Sam",
"Taladris",
"WBT",
"Xerxes",
"aspire94",
"bracco23",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/10730",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/111388",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/120684",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/14506",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/15528",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22768",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36320",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/39510",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/40589",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/43544",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/54637",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63878",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/6878",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/70177",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7368",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/92924",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/97539",
"jkpate",
"user111388",
"user2705196",
"user2768"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
192853 | How can I report an author for using an unethical way of increasing citation in his work?
A professor of mine has been asking students to write research papers for conferences. I wrote a paper and submitted it to him, and he uploaded it in a conference through EasyChair.
While going through the uploaded paper on the conference portal, I found out he had changed the references and replaced them with his own personal work. I immediately withdrew the paper.
Now, while going through his Google Scholar entries, I found out he has been doing this continuously to increase the citation count.
What should I do?
Is there a disciplinary committee in your university?
Is the prof a co-author of the paper?
@MassimoOrtolano, yes there is.
@FedericoPoloni, yes he is co-author.
I’m curious, was the submission blind (authors hidden from reviewers)? A lot of citations to one person’s work can be a red flag to reviewers, and if that person is an author, a huge red flag.
@FredDouglis, yup submission was blind, and it was an IEEE conference.
If the professor is an IEEE member (I assume that the conference was an IEEE conference), then they signed an ethics statement and is subject to IEEE censure. IEEE has a way to denounce someone that protects the whistle-blower. If this was indeed an IEEE conference, but your professor is not a member, then IEEE might still get involved. People have been "black-listed" by IEEE and were not allowed to submit to any IEEE conference for a certain number of years. Since this action is public, it is quite embarrassing for the institution. At the same time, I trust that IEEE procedures are good, protecting both you and your professor.
Ideally, your institution has an ombudsman or similar person that you can go to to share your suspicions with. Unfortunately, often this ideal is not achieved and I will not assume that you (and your professor) would be protected by clear rules of proceeding and confidentiality.
Now, before you go to IEEE, you should do your homework. Write up your case, provide documentation (the conference should have access to your original submission, etc.) and why you are so certain that this is not an isolated incidence. You might also explain why the inserted citations are not appropriate. An obvious defense is that a professor is supposed to help students with publications, and this includes adding pertinent references. Once you submitted your request, you need to leave it to them. That can be very hard.
Given the OP withdrew their paper and the professor is certainly aware of this, keeping anonymity/confidentiality will be hard anyway.
"IEEE has a way to denounce someone that protects the whistle-blower." I hope that your intent was to convey almost the opposite of what you wrote there, unless you intended to paint the IEEE as quite evil.
@Glen_b "IEEE has (a way to denounce someone) that protects the whistleblower."
denounce - "... 2. (transitive) To criticize or speak out against (someone or something); to point out as deserving of reprehension, etc.; to openly accuse or condemn in a threatening manner; to invoke censure upon; to stigmatize; to blame. 3. (transitive) To make a formal or public accusation against; to inform against; to accuse. ..." . Why would the IEEE do that?
There is also "1. (transitive, obsolete) To make known in a formal manner; to proclaim; to announce; to declare.". But it says "obsolete".
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.518237 | 2023-01-25T04:20:39 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/192853",
"authors": [
"Angelica",
"Anthony Joshua",
"Bergi",
"Federico Poloni",
"Fred Douglis",
"Glen_b",
"Massimo Ortolano",
"Peter Mortensen",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/163255",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/167176",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/24184",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/4246",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/46253",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/473",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
150373 | A free papers search engine
Someone told me that there is a search engine that gets you most of research papers I may need for free.
He told me that this search engine is working based on using other members access to researches and make it available for all.
I tried searching for this search engine, but I could not find it.
Which search engine is it?
Your friend is probably thinking of Sci-Hub. Warning: it's likely illegal, including to use the service (as opposed to uploading stuff onto it), in most jurisdictions. If it's not already illegal in your jurisdiction, the trend is towards illegality (i.e. lawsuit after lawsuit has been ruled on, and they are usually in favor of the copyright holder).
If you want to do things legally, try something like Unpaywall, or ask your local librarian. Librarians are incredibly good at finding papers, and they can often access something for free even if you can't.
There has been a lot of debate about the legality of SciHub, both here and on other posts. Since continued debate is unlikely to lead to this answer changing, I have moved this discussion to chat. Please use the chat for continued legal debate.
See also this meta post.
I suggest editing this answer to be more focused on the topic of the question.
It is worth noting that using your library to access such work is free to you, but is often not free to the library.
@commscho that goes without saying - sort of like "turning the lights on is free to you, but must assuredly is not free for your university".
In addition to Sci-Hub and Unpaywall mentioned by Allure, there are also databases for scientific papers which were published legally with an Open Access license, such as CORE an BASE.
I would also add to the above the very commonly used resource Library Genesis, which is less for paywalled papers and more for pdf's of books, including textbooks, but do keep in mind that this definitely falls in the same legal gray area as Sci-Hub and things like torrenting copyrighted materials.
Good answer, but I'll add a remark: In many legal systems there is a clear distinction between torrenting and downloading copyrighted material. Bittorrent is a protocol that involves uploading parts of the file you are downloading to fellow downloaders. Hence if you use it you can be prosecuted not only for using copyrighted material yourself, but for making it available to others. The law typically punishes the latter more harshly.
Google has a search engine called Google Scholar. According to them, "It provides a simple way to broadly search for scholary literature. From one place, you can search across many disciplines and sources: articles, theses, books, abstracts and court opinions, from academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories, universities and other web sites."
Unpaywall is a good option to access free papers from most of the disciplines.
Arxiv.org is an open-source community of free papers. It keeps on growing nowadays.
https://doaj.org/ community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals.
Academia https://www.academia.edu/ offers a great way to connect to researchers. Refer to the paper you like and talk to the researcher and ask for it.
Simply put the full article name, and authors, as the input of the Google Search engine. Very often, the search engine will pull out some free version describing the same work by the same authors. It is most often some unfinished draft how it was while still in preparation and not yet reviewed, but you will be able to get the most of content, just less polished.
arXiv provides preprints of scientific articles that have not been peer reviewed. Many of the articles do subsequently get published in peer reviewed journals.
https://arxiv.org/
ResearchGate is also collecting the papers from authors and providing that to you for free.
Even thought publishers might serve the Research Gate with DMCA letters to take it down, it has a feature that allows authors to keep their papers "privately", which in that case, you can ask the author to let you see their papers, if it is "private".
The downside is that not all papers are in there. But, it has a good growing number of recent articles.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.518597 | 2020-06-11T06:27:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/150373",
"authors": [
"Allure",
"Anonymous Physicist",
"Federico Poloni",
"cag51",
"commscho",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/13240",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/36803",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/79875",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/958"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
186589 | I found some typos in the proof of the main theorem after submission. Shall I contact the editor?
I find a few typos a few days after submitting a paper in the field of applied math (mathematical social science). The typos are in the proof to the main theorem: I've wrongly written some variables "j" as "i". Some formulas were supposed to contain both i's and j's, but some of them were switched to the other one.
So I guess this could be a decisive factor.
I've checked two similar questions here; the answers are suggesting "Don't worry. Typos are not decisive factors". However in math, it is usual that the referees have a high standard of rigidity, and say that they cannot understand the proof, because it is mistaken.
Shall I email the editor as soon as possible? The status is "under review".
How major are the typos?
If they are minor and do not affect comprehension - e.g. if you spelled "typo" as "tpyo" - then there's no need to email the editor and you can fix the error during revision or production.
On the other hand, if you e.g. used the wrong symbol in an equation - then the typo can potentially confuse the reviewer. It's a more serious problem, and you should email the editor to save the reviewer's time.
I appreciate the answer. It is the second case: I mess-up with "i" and "j". It will confuse the reviewers and will be at least considered as sloppy, I guess.
If all the i's and j's are the same variable, I wouldn't worry about it. Only if the formulas were supposed to contain both i's and j's, but some of them were switched to the other one, would I worry about understandability at this point.
@GregMartin Yes the latter case was exactly what I did: some formulas were supposed to contain both i's and j's, but some of them were switched to the other one.
Certain kinds of typos in math equations can do a lot worse than just confusing the reviewer. Depending on the details, using the wrong symbols in a proof can not only impair understanding, but wholly invalidate the result. When the proof in question is the main centerpiece of the paper, typos can be critical must-fix issues.
@Douglas So you believe that I should contact the editor?
@HighGPA sounds like you should contact the editor to me.
@HighGPA Contact the editor, and don't use the word "typo" in your email to the editor. Instead, describe it as errors in the main proof's equations/formulas. That description will much more accurately communicate why you consider these mistakes important enough to contact the editor about.
Typographical errors can be dealt with during the proofing phase of an article, even after it is accepted for publication. There is no need to contact the editor in this case; reviewers may point out typographical errors, but they would not usually be determinative of a recommendation on a paper. If you receive a revise-and-resubmit then you can deal with the typographical errors then, and even if you receive an acceptance, you can deal with them during the proofing stage for the article.
Thanks for your answer. Here is what I did. Some formulas were supposed to contain both i's and j's, but some of them were switched to the other one. So I think the understandability is affected.
If you've accidentally switched variables in a formula, that is a substantive error in the formula, rather than just a typographical error. In any case, you will have an opportunity for corrections in the revision stage.
A few misplaced symbols in a few equations seems too small to bother the editor with. If your paper is well written, with examples in addition to theorems and proofs, the referee will probably work around these mistakes. After all, for every mistake you notice, there are probably three you have not noticed.
Why not contact the journal? I cannot think of a downside.
I personally hate having to correct typos in an article I am reviewing. It makes me feel like the author is simply careless and is inappropriately relying on the review process to get things right.
Contact the journal is just like contacting the super-busy editor. A lot of people are suggesting that typos are ok: this is why I am hesitating.
@HighGPA - while I have never edited a journal, I know several people who have. I think this kind of thing is pretty much what they signed up for. Many things they have to deal with (i.e. conflicts, inappropriate comments, childish behavior) are way more onerous than this :-)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.518978 | 2022-07-02T05:22:31 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/186589",
"authors": [
"Allure",
"Ben",
"Douglas",
"Greg Martin",
"High GPA",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/62187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63087",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/69151",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/84834",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/86123",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026",
"plasmo"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
3202 | Creating a book based on an article (copyright issues)
I've asked this question at math.stackexchange.com, but a comment proposed me to ask this question at academia.stackexchange.com instead.
Here is my question:
Elsevier explicitly permits me to make a book based on my article published with Elsevier.
What's about other publishers? May these forbid me to make a book based on my earlier article?
Are you trying to make a list of publishers that allow publishing earlier articles. If you have some specific publisher(s) in mind, that would be a better question here.
Check with each publisher that publishes one of your articles.
@Vahid: Almost all books draw ideas from articles, but I think this question is talking about reusing text from the articles.
@Vahid: Certainly a citation is always required, but it also legally requires permission of the copyright owner. For the papers used in Chapter 3 of that book, copyright is (probably) held by Elsevier and Springer, so if Connes and Marcolli reused nontrivial amounts of text, then permission was required. In mathematics it is generally not hard to get permission, so it's not a big deal, but it's important to deal with the legal technicalities when publishing a book (the publisher will insist on it, because they do not want to be sued).
The answer is stated in each copyright transfer agreement (CTA) signed for publishing each paper. If the form says it is okay, then it is. Usually you can get your hand on the typical CTA used by a publisher on its website.
I would advise never to sign a CTA that does not allow reuse of the article content for a book, a dissertation and collected works.
If you need to publish the book and you have found one publisher that allows it.
Why do you seek more?
Elaborate what is wrong about Elsevier that makes you not to pursue it with them?
There are a few reasons why I seek more: 1. Elsevier may reject to publish some of my articles (many math articles and even articles by future Nobel laureates are published after several rejections, it is not counted wrong). 2. I may want to publish with open access what at Elsevier is possible only if I pay the cost from my own pocket. 3. There is a boycott of Elsevier and I'd prefer to be a strikebreaker as little as possible, only in the case if I really need Elsevier.
You'll need to check the particular policies of each publisher to see what is allowed and what is not allowed. However, it is important to remember that the journal's copyright protections are limited to how the material is expressed in the paper, and not the underlying ideas themselves.
Typically, that means that you won't be able to "recycle" text and figures from the article into a book. However, an expansion and reworking of the ideas normally is not subject to copyright violation claims, particularly if you're the author of the paper which was expanded in the first place. (This normally gives you additional privileges, depending on the publishers in question.)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T12:55:49.519345 | 2012-09-14T18:12:52 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "academia.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3202",
"authors": [
"Anonymous Mathematician",
"Ansa211",
"Dave Clarke",
"Kyle Cureau",
"Marshall",
"Noble P. Abraham",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1580",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/1637",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28662",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/28693",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/612",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/643",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8186",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8187",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/8188",
"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9388",
"jpshuimu",
"jub0bs",
"porton",
"rafee"
],
"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.