<issue_start>username_0: I was just looking at a different post that cites National Center for Educational Statistics about how professors of all levels spend their time. I am actually doing some research on faculty hiring practices at research universities.

[How much time do professors have to do research on their own?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27493/how-much-time-do-professors-have-to-do-research-on-their-own/27494#27494)

The thrust of the data is that most professors, whether tenure track or non-tenure track spend more than 50% of their time on teaching. I imagine this data is averaged across both research and teaching universities, but still teaching must make up the bulk of time or even professors at research universities--whether that be teaching classes, mentoring grad students, committees, etc.

But at the same time, I know that the hiring criteria for the research universities focuses on publication records with little if any concern about teaching evaluations and such. I am not trying to make a critique or political point, this is just something that I have understood from my interactions with professors and other graduate students.

Now my assumption is that most research university departments get the majority of their money from student tuition. I might be wrong about this, and if I am wrong please let me know. We also know that the ability to do research does not always correlate with teaching ability.

So I want to understand the mechanisms that allow research universities to continue to hire professors who are not necessarily the best teachers? Of course, there are many amazing professors at universities who are excellent teachers. I am not trying to make a blanket statement by any means. I just mean that you would probably get better teachers if the primary hiring criteria was teaching ability, right.

By mechanisms I mean, if student tuition is the main source of money, then why do students keep paying for classes taught by not always the best teachers? Or is there just so much money coming into research universities from grants, etc., that they can afford these large professor salaries despite the loss of undergraduate students? Like how does this actually work?

I imagine part of the answer to this question is associated with the growth in non-tenure-track faculty like adjuncts. That seems like it would solve some problems. But still why can universities who seem to get most of their money from students, get away with paying so little attention to students when it comes to hiring faculty?

Any insights are welcome. Again, if I phrased anything indelicately, please forgive me. I was not trying to cast any aspersions on anyone. Just purely thinking from an economic rationale.<issue_comment>username_1: Because they don't spend most of their time teaching. For example, officially the expectation is that I spend half my time on research, a third on teaching, and a sixth on service (e.g. administrative responsibilities).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: One contributing factor is that research ability is much easier(\*) to measure than teaching effectiveness.

Beyond some level of basic competence, how effective a professor is with students depend quite a lot on the characteristics of the student body. A professor can be quite effective with a certain student body but quite inept with another.

Teaching evaluations give very little information about how effective a teacher someone is; they just say how popular a teacher is with their students - which is not the same thing. Generally, it seems that professors get better evaluations if they spoonfeed material to students and don't make their classes too challenging, telling the students what they need to write on exams rather than getting them to think.

Peer evaluations don't seem too useful either; a peer can only spend so much time observing a class, and the effects of a professor seem to be too subtle to measure over an hour. Also, just because someone is a good teacher doesn't mean they know what to look for to judge whether other people are good teachers.

Student performance is too variable and dependent on the group of students. Also, what we would really like to know is whether students develop over the course of their studies the ability to contribute original ideas to complex projects related but not identical to material they should learn. This is hard to measure within the context of a single course/module. For example, it happens frequently that a curricular unit is originally introduced (as one of the last in a course/module) to get students to synthesize for themselves various ideas they should learn in a course, an exam item is introduced to test whether students have managed to synthesize all these ideas, but, over time, students and instructors become accustomed to the particular (type of) exam item and this curricular unit becomes teaching students how to do this exam item by rote. Exam results look better, but learning has been diminished. (It doesn't help that such an evolution typically improves student evaluations even as it destroys the aim of this curricular unit!)

(\*) Maybe it's not actually easier. However, there is a research community that is willing to volunteer (as reviewers and editors) and able to do this evaluation and report reasonably accurately on it, whereas an institution has to do the work of evaluating teaching effectiveness by itself since it depends much more on local factors.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I think this state of affairs may be easier to understand if we look at it in this direction:

University needs good researchers because that is a core part of their mission --> now that we've got these great researchers on board, let's have most of them (but not Fomite!) teach too, since teaching is a core part of the university's mission too, and since a great researcher would understand the material inside and out.

If you go at it like this, great teaching will be icing on the cake, not fundamental from the ground up.

There are smaller "liberal arts" schools that supposedly emphasize great teaching. (Maybe I've had bad luck, but the ones I visited were disappointing. My conclusion was, the best thing a student could do, when shopping for a university, is enroll in a large institution and then pick and choose the best instructors.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'd like to add a few important points. Tenured positions in many universities are a way to attract well known, accomplished academic staff. Having famous professors increases prestige of the university and makes it attractive to potential students, who in turn are willing to pay higher tuition. That's the business side.

Another important point is that in many fields you have to be a good and active researcher to be a good teacher. For example, in my field of economics, we always have to stay up to date with current research. Things change so quickly that in 10 years the same lesson plan doesn't only become obsolete, it can become plain wrong. That doesn't apply to all fields, but it applies to many. In engineering fields, for example, there is a constant struggle to make things simpler, easier, and more efficient. Being an active researcher shows that the professor is at least aware of the new and better things that are out there.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: You asked many different questions in your question.
I'll only be addressing some of them in my answer.

In my opinion,
the reason why tenure-track professors are hired
on the basis of their research rather than their teaching
is due to the following reasons.
I have ordered the reasons from what I think are
the most important reasons, to the least important reasons:

1. The professors in an academic department
care about hiring the best researchers
because that would affect their school's research ranking.
For example, in business schools,
there is a ranking of business school research known as
[The UTD Top 100 Business School Research Rankings](http://jindal.utdallas.edu/the-utd-top-100-business-school-research-rankings/worldRankings#20122016).
This is an *objective* and *measurable* way
to rank business schools in their research,
although you could argue about whether
*quality* is more important than *quantity*.
2. On the other hand,
it is extremely difficult to accurately measure the teaching quality
of a particular academic department.
For example, how do you objectively measure and compare
the teaching experience of say
Harvard Business School versus Stanford Graduate School of Business?
I imagine that if there were a magical way to measure teaching quality,
and schools could be objectively compared on this metric,
schools would try to improve their teaching performance and their ranking.
3. Finally,
it is not true that the hiring committee does not consider
a job candidate's teaching ability in a hiring decision.
Typically, there is a 1-hour research presentation
as part of the tenure-track hiring process.
In my opinion, the ability of a candidate to explain his/her research clearly
has moderate correlation with the ability of the candidate
to do a "good enough" job of teaching students in a lecture setting.
If a candidate is extremely brilliant,
but shows poor presentation and social skills,
that would definitely count as a negative in deciding to hire this candidate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I think part of the answer here is that in most fields we just don't need that great teachers. At this age student in a good university are expected to pick up the material themselves, esp nowadays with all the textbooks and supplementary information available. If you need someone who spoon feed you everything you may be not ready for university. So a good average teacher can do most of the work, and his/her research experience, knowledge of the cutting edge techniques of the field is the more important part, that textbook does not contain. Sure, good/ better than average teacher can be helpful, but less harm if they are not, one should be able to make up without them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: From the perspective of a smaller school whose faculty do not spend a majority of their time doing research. In no particular order:

* Successful researchers have to be current with their field. The world moves pretty fast today, especially in STEM fields. A great teacher who is 5-10 years behind the state of the art is going to be less valuable to our students than a decent teacher who stays on top of things. Even if you only publish once a year or every other year, that still means that you have to bring yourself up to date every 12-24 months. Most people have had the experience of a woefully out of date professor, and it's a horrible experience.
* Small research projects create opportunities for students outside the classroom. In particular it creates reasonable undergraduate research experiences, which are vital for students who are considering graduate school. Without these opportunities during the semester our students' only option for an informative research experience would be an REU at another location after their sophomore or junior year.
* Our department doesn't have a doctoral program, but we're a part of an R2 school whose administration would like to see more research being done. This creates downward pressure from the administration to hire researchers, and lateral pressure from colleagues to do so. For example, the university tenure guidelines require a reasonable amount of research activity for an R2 institution. Even if our department decided that we all just wanted to be great teachers and forget about research, the university wouldn't approve anyone's tenure case. Not having any tenure-track positions would effectively end our department.
* Most Ph.D. holders do not have any formal educational training. We all tend to be mediocre teachers in that respect (especially out of grad school). If your options are between two mediocre teachers, but one of those people has a better research track record, why wouldn't you pick that person?

I will object to your statement, *"I know that the hiring criteria for the research universities focuses on publication records with little if any concern about teaching evaluations and such."* Universities do not want to hire bad teachers. If you had two otherwise equal candidates for a job, but you knew that the first of them was a bad teacher, you'd offer the job to the second person. Likewise, if you had two otherwise equal candidates and one of them had great evidence of being a great teacher, you'd be inclined towards the great teacher.

However, objective teaching evaluations are hard to get for anybody, and especially for graduate students who have had little teaching experience. It is true that a *research-oriented position* will more highly value research qualifications, and there's nothing wrong with that. However, teaching-oriented positions aren't given a pass on teaching qualifications. It's becoming more standard as these positions become more common for those who apply for lecturer/teaching oriented positions to be asked to give a sample lecture. For teaching-oriented positions any evidence of good teaching such as past favorable evaluations or teaching grants or awards would be taken into account in the hiring process as well.
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper to a peer-reviewed journal. On the first round of review, 3 reviewers had different comments and I tried my best to answer them. On the second round of review, two of them were almost satisfied but the third one had an aggressive tone and asked some questions that were completely answered in the paper or were basically wrong questions.

I answered the reviewer's comments and sent the paper, but one of my friends told me that it was better to ask the editor-in-chief to change the reviewer. I want to know, is that possible? How?<issue_comment>username_1: Certainly you can ask. It's not impossible that the editor would agree, though it's pretty unlikely.

What you describe:

>
> the third one had an aggressive tune and ask some questions that were completely answered in the paper or were basically wrong question.
>
>
>

is normal. Many reviewers take an aggressive tone. Often they ask questions that were answered in the paper. The correct response to "an aggressive tone" is to reply in a professional tone, and the correct response to a question that is answered in the paper is to accept that you were not clear enough in the paper, and to improve the explanation.

(Note, by the way, that this one short sentence I quoted has three grammatical/spelling errors. If this represents how the paper was written, it's not surprising that the paper was unclear, and the reviewer's annoyance is perfectly understandable.)

As for the "basically wrong question" ... [here's an illustration of how common the "reviewer number three" syndrome](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VRBWLpYCPY) is.

I'm not saying it's good that one out of three reviewers is borderline incompetent. I'm saying that this is part of the territory, this is something every scientist has to deal with, and we don't, can't possibly, all write to the editor and demand they remove Reviewer Number Three. Instead, what we all do is extract the useful parts of the review, accept that if the reviewer doesn't understand something it's mainly our fault for being unclear and fix that, and work as best we can with the reviewer's concerns. In your response to the reviewer, you can clearly and professionally explain why the point is mistaken, and explain what you have done to help clarify it.

Editors often (I think; I know it happens sometimes) unofficially deprecate particular reviews, based on their reading. They are just as good at detecting "aggressive" and outright hostile reviews, and know to put less weight on it.

But you can ask the editor to remove a reviewer. They're more likely to listen if the reviewer is not just aggressive, but outright hostile; when the reviewer makes an unambiguous statement that isn't just a minority opinion, but is flat wrong, and you can clearly show that; or when the reviewer is just completely out of their depth.

But the burden is on you to absolutely clearly, professionally, with no trace of hurt feelings or antagonism, show that the reviewer is without doubt incompetent. If you can't do every part of that 100%, don't even bother. Deal with it the way all the rest of us do.

You may want to look at other answers to questions in the "peer-review" tag to get a sense of the community's feelings:

* [How common is it to get one very positive and one very negative review?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/69669/how-common-is-it-to-get-one-very-positive-and-one-very-negative-review?rq=1)
* [A frequent reviewer seems to have a grudge against me. What to do?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/58622/a-frequent-reviewer-seems-to-have-a-grudge-against-me-what-to-do)
* [What to do if reviewers reject a paper without understanding the content?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5865/what-to-do-if-reviewers-reject-a-paper-without-understanding-the-content)
* [How to proceed when reviewers reject your manuscript but you believe there is no scientific basis for their objections?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79683/how-to-proceed-when-reviewers-reject-your-manuscript-but-you-believe-there-is-no?noredirect=1&lq=1)

And many more.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Well, of course it's possible to ask the editor-in-chief to change the reviewer: you would do that by writing to the editor-in-chief and asking them to change the reviewer.

However, I disagree that it is a good idea to do this. Although it must happen every now and then, changing the reviewer on request of the author is (in my experience at least) highly irregular and sounds like a "a big ask." In order to grant this request, the editor would have to understand and agree that this reviewer's comments are totally out of line. But an editor who feels this way is prepared to not hold this reviewer's comments against you anyway. And the converse is not true: I think many editors would rather keep a reviewer and not hold (all or some of) their critiques against the author than go through the formal procedure of finding a new reviewer upon the author's request.

Instead I recommend that you carefully consider all of the reviewers' comments, make changes when you think they are appropriate, and send along a document describing the changes you made and also explanations for why you didn't make certain requested changes. If you feel that you are right and a reviewer is wrong: say so, clearly, factually, and politely.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it possible to ask editor-in-chief to change a reviewer?
>
>
>

In your situation, I think you are asking the wrong question. The "right" question might be something like: How do I deal with an "annoying" referee?

In this case, I suggest addressing, in a professional manner, this reviewer's comments as you have before. Additionally, send the editor-in-chief a separate note describing your concerns about this particular reviewer so that the EiC

1. is made aware of the situation and
2. can weigh the reviewer's comments and your responses to those in a more objective fashion.

Again, you want to be professional in your communications to the EiC.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As a past editor-in-chief of an IEEE magazine, I never had an author ask for this, and as an author of several journal and magazine articles, I've never thought to request it regardless of how much I disliked or disagreed with a review.

Instead, I think authors should play the cards they're dealt. [@Pete\_L\_Clark's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/91160/41302) makes the point that you should simply respond to reviewer comments, and push back on those you might disagree with. I'll add to this that if you make a strong enough point about why a reviewer is mistaken, I think an editor will either push back on the reviewer or opt to go to someone else in re-review. This of course assumes that you get a revision outcome of some sort; if it's rejected because of the review you disagree with, you really have no recourse other than submitting elsewhere.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I think Tail of Godzilla needs at least one level deeper an analysis of the problem than is shown in the question. It should be possible to tell from the nature and wording of the obstreperous objections being posed what the problem is.

It could be ideology, professional jealousy or personal academic rivalry, stupidity, or occasionally even an actual question about the content of the paper under review. Each of these is different and calls for a different plan of battle.
Upvotes: 0


<issue_start>username_0: Suppose a couple of years into a PhD program one gets a job offer he/she is quite happy with and decides to take it. This could be for one or several reasons such as:

1. You are at a point in your life where you need some money and its financially more secure to work rather than being a graduate student.
2. It's a good idea to experience what the work force/industry/"real world" is like for a bit.
3. You may not be satisfied with your research topic/advisor at your PhD institute.

Assume also that during this couple of years one has acquired enough credits to get a masters before leaving.

My question is after working a couple of years, how would it be viewed by graduate committees if I decide to reapply for PhD programs in case I decide I really want to finish the PhD now that I am financially at a better place and have a good first hand experience of what its like being at both sides of academia.<issue_comment>username_1: If you leave with a master's you can't use the same material again for another degree. It is also likely that the state of the art will advance enough in the intervening time that the research would be out of date/already done by someone else. Thus, you can't "resume" a PhD.

However, if you graduate with a master's in hand now, it is quite possible to apply for a PhD after a few years working. But you will have to start again and spend the full study period producing enough new research to be worthy of the degree. (This might be shorter, e.g. in the UK-style system students with a research master's are expected to complete their PhD in 3 years compared to 4 years for students with a bachelor's or a taught master's.) This is quite normal and will not be viewed negatively (although the fact that you started a PhD and "bailed out early" by taking the master's might, depending on the circumstances - but this is only likely to be known if you reapply to the same institution).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Through the computer science point of view, all three reasons you've listed above tells me that you are better off in the industry.

>
> You are at a point in your life where you need some money and its
>  financially more secure to work rather than being a graduate student.
>
>
>

Indeed. But the point of doing research as a grad student is having less money for more time. Even though most of the [PhD comics](http://phdcomics.com/comics/archive_list.php) disagree with me, I find conducting research at a good university gives you a lot of time to spend for yourself.
You will have the *deadlines*, not the *working hours*. Thus, either working at your office, or at home in the night, is completely up to you.

Also, not to disagree every single thing, but you have way more financial security as a researcher compared to the industry. Unless you behave very unethical, it is an extreme case that a university cuts out your funds.

>
> It's a good idea to experience what the work force/industry/"real
>  world" is like for a bit.
>
>
>

This reason speaks for itself. If you're thinking the industry is the real world and conducting research is imaginary(?) world, then your choice must be very clear by now.

>
> You may not be satisfied with your research topic/advisor at your PhD
>  institute.
>
>
>

The solution to this is simply changing your research topic and advisor. This is another point in academia, that you have all the freedom in the world to work *whatever* you want. Opposed to industry, where usually your boss tells you what to do and what not to do.

As I've discussed this topic [earlier](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/65514/15949), I believe having a PhD degree cannot be measured by how much extra money you've missed, or is it really worth it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Caveat: I've not yet done admissions, so be skeptical of my answer and use your own judgement.

My impression is that admissions committees are really only concerned about a two things:

1. Is an applicant capable of handling the technical work and coursework necessary for obtaining a PhD?
2. Is an applicant likely to stay through the program and finish?

Leaving a PhD program and then coming back later really only influences their analysis of that second question. As long as you can appropriately explain why your current PhD program wasn't working out, why switching to industry was a good thing at the time you did so, and most importantly describe why you're committed to following through on a new PhD program, then I don't think that leaving with a master's will be much of a disadvantage.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but the attitude you describe does not sound surprising at all in my field (computer science). If a prospective student told me some variation of this story it wouldn't dissuade me one bit:

"I didn't understand how my work was valuable or would fit into industrial practice, so I left academics for a few years to gain that experience. Having seen how things are actually done in the real world, I'm really eager to come back and make specific contributions with that knowledge in mind."
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing a research proposal for a PhD in a very interesting field. While working on the proposal I noticed that I run through the following (emotional) stages:

1. Enthusiasm: I think about the topic and am excited to work on it. I
start thinking about what I want to do and how I am going to do it.
2. Optimism: I do the necessary initial research on the topic and am
still excited. My interest in the topic grows and I am very
optimistic.
3. Self-doubt: I start writing and suddenly I am confronted with questions I can’t answer. I start doubting myself and think about all the things I don’t know. I start thinking that I am incapable of finishing this and that I really have no idea about the topic and what is expected of me. I try pushing through but am really hitting a brick-wall.
4. Desperation: I can’t get any work done because I don’t think I can do
the work. I get depressed and angry and make no progress.
5. Mild optimism: I somehow get myself to work on the project again. I
start with the easy parts and just push through until it is all
done. I start thinking that it wasn’t all that bad and that the
desperation really wasn’t necessary. While I am mostly satisfied
with the outcome I still doubt that the result is the best I could
do.

Looking back at my time as a student1 I realized that I run through those stages every time I have to do scientific writing. While I am never quite satisfied with the result, I have always received great feedback and excellent grades from my professors.

Now that I am thinking about doing a PhD I am starting to doubt if I am the right candidate for this because of my difficult writing process. While I know a few people who run trough similar stages I also know people that are enthusiastic throughout the entire process and love writing scientific papers. Maybe those people are more suited for PhD programmes than I am.

So my question is:
**Are self-doubt and desperation a normal part of scientific writing?**

Related questions:
*Can I still be a good researcher if I constantly doubt the quality of my work?
Is there something that I can do to mitigate this part of the process?*

---

1Not sure if this is relevant but I have written several smaller papers in class, two bachelor’s theses and two master’s theses (in different academic fields).<issue_comment>username_1: I start with you related questions:

>
> Can I still be a good researcher if I constantly doubt the quality of my work?
>
>
>

You got it the wrong way. The real question is: Can I be a good researcher without constant doubt of the quality of my work? And the answer to this question is **no**. You should always question your work and and strive to make it better. Doubt is an integral part of research. But beware, that you should come out of this with "yes, my work matters/is of good quality/is relevant…" often enough either by your own conclusion of by feedback of others.

>
> Is there something that I can do to mitigate this part of the process?
>
>
>

Not sure, but you do not really need to. Please read [this thread](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2219/how-should-i-deal-with-discouragement-as-a-graduate-student) to see how to deal with insecurity and doubt as a researcher. You'll also find that the answer to

>
> Are self-doubt and desperation a normal part of scientific writing?
>
>
>

is most likely to be **yes** for most people regarding doubt and partly regarding desperation (assuming that "scientific writing" and "doing research" are quite similar in this respect). As <NAME> notes, you should critically ask yourself if your self-doubt is close to be "pathological". I am not qualified in any way to give advice on how to diagnose yourself but you may want to read about the [impostor syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> I also know people that are enthusiastic throughout the entire process and love writing scientific papers.
>
>
>

That's great! I'm not sure I know anyone who is enthusiastic through the *entire* process. Having moments of doubt is pretty common, if not universal. The best thing you can do is accept that you're going to have moments of desperation (stage 4), while realizing that you have control over the way out.

People often think that they can't work until they feel better. As you describe it, you feel mildly optimistic and *then* you somehow get to work again. But often times it's the reverse. You get to work, and making progress makes you feel more confident and optimistic. So sit down, set yourself to finishing a small chunk of work, thank stage 4 for its constructive criticism, and show it the door.
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: I'm starting my master's thesis work with a new professor and had a really bad meeting with them recently. They asked me questions I am supposed to be able to answer, but I was so stressed I couldn't think. I couldn't write stuff on the board. It was just a mess.

He said some things that made me feel pretty bad about myself and I really don't want that to happen again in the next meeting. Could someone please share their ways on how they prepare for research meetings they are nervous for?<issue_comment>username_1: Personally, the best way to handle a situation like that is to sit and listen. Then afterwards reflect upon what your adviser has said so that you can better prepare for your next meeting. I have had plenty of meetings where I went in feeling confident and then left feeling like crap.

If you are able to, I would send an email with a list of topics you would like to cover in your meeting. If he doesn't respond, then focus on that list. If he respond, then adjust accordingly. Like-wise, if he doesn't respond, but then goes into the meeting like he hasn't read the email, I would bring up how there's a lack of communication and that you can't do your research if communication is going to be limited to just these meetings.

Perhaps it's just his attitude and demeanor that makes you feel uncomfortable and unable to complete your work - in which case, you might want to consider finding another professor to finish your thesis under.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you're a new graduate student, and that you clearly care about performing well in your program. You stumbled, and you've accepted responsibility and looking for ways to correct the problem. That's great, and suggests that you will end up doing very well in your program. As a master's student, you're not expected to be able to work completely independently, and your professors will likely be happy to help you navigate your program (they certainly *should*). The key is to ask for help early and often.
I would consider scheduling an appointment with my adviser, telling them exactly what you've said here, and asking them for advice on how to prepare for meetings, and perhaps even advice on how to structure your independent learning so that you're learning the specific techniques/concepts that want you to know at each stage. Every adviser is different, so the best advice you can get will come directly from them. It may be intimidating to ask for help, but it is completely appropriate at this stage in your graduate education.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]


<issue_start>username_0: I have a master and bachelor degree in Aerospace engineering. Master degree was from the most prestigious institute in my country (India).

Then I moved on to my Ph.D., but this time into a different field. Physical Chemistry. Particularly because I wanted to do fundamental science rather than engineering. I am doing pretty good in my Ph.D. (in terms of publication and progress)

Will having a degree from different fields be a trouble when I apply for a postdoc (in Physical chemistry) in top universities (like Cambridge or Princeton)? Also will this affect me when I try for a tenure track position?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, people are much more interested in your publications and research specialty then your previous degrees.

A previous degree in a separate field is more of an asset that can open new doors; you are a credible person for any possible cooperation between your current and previous field (about which I know little; maybe creating or investigating materials that might be of use in aerospace engineering). Interdisciplinary work is difficult unless someone knows both of the fields and understands their concerns and languages.

I suppose someone might see a positive or negative signal in you having changed a field (learning an entirely new field in your PhD studies is certainly impressive, or maybe you lack some fundamentals in your new field, and almost certainly you stand out from among many other candidates whose master's degree is in a more usual field), but this could go either way and depends on the person doing the hiring. I would not be worried.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, your PhD will be in the same field as you're looking for a postdoc/TT job in, so I especially wouldn't worry about it in that regard. People switch fields as their interests evolve, and having a PhD in Physical Chemistry implies you've now spent several years of fairly dedicated study in it.

Similarly, as you're applying to positions in that field, I don't think you need to worry about sending a signal about hopping around a lot, as you're only really talking about two fields and a single transition.

Generally, I think people are far more interested in your publications, your research interests, and what you might bring to the table. I've seen people "re-task" themselves in postdocs or tenure track positions from different fields because they could tell a coherent story about why they should be there.

For the record, my BA, PhD, Postdoc and current job are all in different (albeit related) fields.
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: Thanks but what if I write an article in English and use some quotations in Turkish since my intended readers are bilingual; that is Turkish and English?

I refer to Ms <NAME>'s Bilingual Wordsmiths: The Challenges of Writing in Two Languages<issue_comment>username_1: Stick to English for the entirety of the article if you are publishing it to a journal, website, where the primary language is English for both its content (and if not more importantly) its readers. If you quote Turkish (or any other language for that matter) make sure that you provide an English translation.

Just because your intended readers are bilingual, doesn't mean that they all have the same level of competency in both languages to understand both fluently. Provide a common means by which those with less skill can understand your quotes.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If the intended reader can reasonably be presumed to be fluent in both languages, then no translation should be necessary.

I work with literature in three modern Romance languages with texts that are modern to medieval. I do **not** provide translations for Spanish or Portuguese when I write in English, and only provide them for Asturian where the meaning of the quote is not clear from the perspective of a modern Spanish or Portuguese speaker. I do not generally expect to see translations generally when I see quotations in French or Italian, and if the article is on medieval literature, I do not expect to see translations for Latin, but I do generally expect it for Latin in articles on modern literature and for Romanian in general, and anytime there is a finer language distinction (for example, comparing two words that would be translated similarly into English). For other regional/minority languages, the practice is similar to what I do with Asturian — if they can be reasonably understood without potential for misunderstanding, no translation necessary, but otherwise, translations are provided.

The editor that you work with will make the final say, of course. If they feel translations are necessary for the journal's audience, then they will request translations. Likewise, if you already provide translations and they don't think they are necessary, then they will recommend removing them before publishing.
Upvotes: 0


<issue_start>username_0: ### TL;DR

In the coming semester,
I will be teaching a "seminar" type course with around 30 students.
I would like to disallow students in the course
to use any electronic devices (smartphones, tablets and laptops)?

**Questions:**

* Is banning electronic devices in my course a good idea?
* How do I enforce such a rule?

### Background

In the coming semester, I will be teaching a "seminar" type course.
The course is fairly small, with fewer than 30 students.
We will spend most of the time in the course
listening to students presenting their ideas,
and the students critiquing and giving feedback
on other students' presentations.

I have had a few years of experience teaching
large lecture courses with more than 100 students per lecture.
In these courses, many of the students prefer
to type their notes on my Powerpoint slides,
rather than writing on a physical copy of the lecture notes.
Unfortunately, as I walk around the classroom,
I invariably notice that a significant proportion of the students
are distracted during the class by their electronic devices,
e.g., checking their Facebook, Instagram or playing games.
(I would estimate about 20% of students
are distracted at any given point of time.)

I have noticed that I work better without electronic devices
because I am less distracted and can focus better.
Consequently, I would hope to minimize the distractions faced by students
by disallowing students in the course to use any electronic devices.

### Why do I want to ban electronic devices from the course?

The main goal of the course is to teach students
how to analyze and present business case studies.
The course is not one that is heavy on facts or memorization.
Instead, students need to use their powers of observation
to follow along presentations by their fellow students,
and to evaluate their presentation style, body language and slide design.

Consequently, for this type of course,
I do not see that electronic devices add any value.
In fact, there are many research studies which suggest that
electronic devices negatively affect students' learning.
For example, an [article](https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-athletes-way/201706/are-smartphones-making-us-stupid) in Psychology Today writes the following:

>
> Cognitive capacity and overall brain power are significantly reduced when your smartphone is within glancing distance—even if it’s turned off and face down—according to a recent study. This new report from the University of Texas at Austin, “[Brain Drain: The Mere Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity](http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/691462)” was published in the Journal of the Association for Consumer Research.
>
>
> During this study, the UT Austin researchers found that someone’s ability to hold and process data significantly improved if his or her smartphone was in another room while taking a test to gauge attentional control and cognitive processes. Participants who kept their phones in a pocket or bag also outperformed those who kept their phones on the desk while taking the same test. Again, even if the phone was turned off and face down on the desk, the mere sight of one's own smartphone seemed to induce “brain drain” by depleting finite cognitive resources.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Banning devices is generally poorly received, everyone likes to think they know best about their own study habits. (For some of those 20%, they will be right, for others, you will be right.)

In a mandatory seminar I had to attend where it was very evident that no one wanted to be there (including the presenters), what the organizers eventually settled on was requiring all students to hand in half a page with summary and comments at the end of each talk. This forces note-taking in the immediate and generally makes the students too busy to look at their devices much even if they have them open.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you will get bogged down in the enforcer role here and it will detract from your teaching. Some of the best instructors I had knew at which point of their lecture they should ask questions and took the time to learn students names. Then you can first ask the questions to people goofing off, and follow up with someone paying attention. The peer pressure to know the answers could help people focus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you would like to ban devices from your classroom, I think that's your call as an instructor. It's part of your academic freedom at most institutions to conduct your class the way you'd like. I imagine you would enforce it by asking any student caught using a device to put it away or, perhaps on repeat offenses, to bring it to the front of the room for retrieval after class. You would not be first instructor who's done this.

But to me, thirty students is big to be called a seminar. With thirty students, not everyone gets to talk as much as they might want. Sometimes they'll be simply waiting their turn to speak or checking out, waiting for the discussion to come back to something they're interested in. That sounds a lot like the faculty meetings I go to. We usually get about twenty-five, all there to listen to presentations and participate in discussions of faculty business. But we all have laptops and smartphones and many are using them. I don't know why I'd expect students to behave differently than faculty.

On occasion, I find it helpful that students have laptops in my own lectures (in CS) when a question comes up that I can't answer (which happens a lot :). If I don't want to take the time to do it myself, I might ask, can someone do the experiment or Google the answer?

Also, since I publish my lecture slides just before each lecture, I find that a lot of students are legitimately using their laptops to look at slides, which can sometimes be more readable on their laptops than on the screen from way in the back of the room.

So I think you can ban devices and I think you can enforce it. You can try it and see what happens. But I also think you're fighting the tide. Connectivity is here to stay. I can't say if you'll see other results you hope for, but the one result I do predict is that the students will be unhappy with you and it will probably show up in your student evals.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Be aware that some students with alternate needs may be prescribed electronic devices as a teaching/learning aid. Depending on your legal jurisdiction their needs may also be confidential and you may not be notified, but to ban them would create legal or ethical problems for you or the institution.

I cite, for example, the recording of the class for those with handwriting difficulties or vision impairment and so on.

It is a mistake to stereotype students' use of devices in class as always something suspicious as the population is wider than that.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: (I'm a student)

Why do you want to ban the laptops?

Just because some students get distracted? If this is the only reason, that is almost a question of philosophy: Should you force the students into a situation that you think is best for them or should you assume them to be mature enough to decide what's best for them?
If your students were around the age of 12 years old, I'd agree that you should ban the laptops. But I'm assuming that your students have to be somewhat self-disciplied anyways to study for the courses in their 'free-time'.

I like writing my notes on the laptop. If you or the content of your course requires the students to take notes, please allow electronic devices. If the course is entirely focused on participation and taking notes would actually be useless, it might actually make sense to forbid using the devices because then the students would probably participate more.

In a class with only ~30 students, the following does not apply, but regarding your observation that some students are playing games during your lectures:

You will never be able to give the lecture in a tempo that fits every of the 100+ students perfectly. Some may be constantly bored and it suffices for them to listen with one ear while they are gaming or working on something else. Some are perfectly happy with your speed but get bored once somebody who was a bit slower asks a question.

In my experience, when I try to listen to a (to me) boring lecture, my thoughts just drift after a few minutes and I have not much to take away from the lecture. If I instead find a balance so that I can listen to you while it's interesting and keep myself awake and active by doing something else while it's not, I get more out of it.

>
> Is banning electronic devices in my course a good idea?
>
>
>

In general a big no from me, because students don't like to be told how they should behave. Why would you need to enforce something like that when *they are here because **they** want to learn*. However, I encourage you to mention your observations to them and that you think the electronic devices might be detrimental to their learning, so they can make an educated choice.

In your case however, with only 30 students where you expect them to actively participate instead of just listen and understand, it can make sense.

But if only one student is presenting and the rest are supposed to sit and listen (opposed to interactively asking questions and discussing) then I feel like it's a similar situation to my usual lectures.

>
> I have noticed that I work better without electronic devices because I am less distracted and can focus better.
>
>
>

True. On the other hand, I can learn better *with* electronic devices because it is easy to look something up that I didn't understand without having to interrupt the lecture to ask a question. It's also imo better for note-taking because you can paste parts of the slides and freely rearrange them.

>
> How do I enforce such a rule?
>
>
>

First of all, please provide a good reason to the students along with the statement that it is forbidden. Otherwise you will get a few of them on the wrong side and they will still try to use the devices. Without cooperation, enforcing this would be very hard I imagine.

Secondly, give them a good reason not to get distracted. If they are required to be present anyways, it might be an idea to give out grades for participation. Or ensure that the content of the lecture is *really* interesting.

Think also about when you want to make exceptions. What if somebody has special needs, e.g. does not see the screen from afar? What if some student has an important deadline incoming and wants to work on that during your class, but still came to not miss completely everything? Etc.

Alternative Solution:

>
> Some of the best instructors I had knew at which point of their lecture they should ask questions and took the time to learn students names. Then you can first ask the questions to people goofing off, and follow up with someone paying attention.
>
>
>

This is a quote of username_2's answer, and it reminded me of a tutor we had who everybody considered to be *really* great. The thing that set him apart is that he noticed when somebody was getting bored, distracted or lost, and asked that person a question. It might be a really simple one just to get their focus back, or it might be one that tests whether they are bored because they already know the content or rather because they're getting tired. Often, when one student would not know the answer, a different student would know the answer (and could explain it to everybody who lost track) or nobody else knew it either and the tutor knew what he had to explain again.

Such questions make people who are zoning out focus again, even if they are not the ones who were asked. And if it is fine to say "I don't know", nobody is afraid of being asked either, so they can answer honestly and give the tutor information about what they got and what not.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: When it came time to make this decision for myself I examined why I might want to establish such a ban and came to the conclusion that I had two plausible reasons:

1. To prevent one student's electronics from distracting other students
2. Because research (up to that point) showed that the available options for computerized note-taking (or substitutes for it) led to less learning.

And this being for college I concluded that (2) wasn't my business beyond warning students of the effect, but (1) was a legitimate concern.

The text that went into my syllabus was

>
> You are expected to refrain from disrupting the class or
>  interfering with your peers' ability to pay attention. That means
>  among other things no texting, no calling, no IMing, no emailing,
>  and no social networking. During group-work and interactive
>  teaching it may be appropriate to use internet resources to
>  obtain facts and figures.
>
>
> You may use a computing device to take notes, so I'm not banning
>  them from the classroom, but it is your responsibility to insure
>  that they do not become a distraction. At a minimum this means
>  turning off *all* audible feedback. If you are using a
>  device with an upright screen (rather than a pad) you should sit
>  in a back row so that the activity on your screen does not
>  present a visual distraction to your neighbors.
>
>
>

I've had no complaints either from students who thought the policy was too restrictive or from students who were being distracted and those few students who have used laptops have been happy to move to the back.

I don't know how I would handle the situation where a student with visual trouble that required them to be up front wanted to use a laptop. That's a hard case.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: I am normally in favor of letting students make their own decisions, but the evidence against laptops in the classroom is so strong by now that I decided to ban them in my classes (which are mostly lecture). However, there are three exceptions: disability, very bad handwriting, and the possibility of giving me a write-up about why it's a bad idea to take notes on a laptop. The last one both allows students to make an informed choice if they really love their laptops and, more importantly, provides plausible deniability to those with disabilities that they don't want to publicly disclose. (So far, no one has used any of these options.) I explain the reason for this policy in my syllabus and provide links to popular science articles explaining the research. So far, I have taught two classes with this policy and experienced no pushback and no need for enforcement. If there was, "Please put that away" should do the job.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Enough good research has been done at this point (see two sources below) that show that student learning is compromised by use of computers in the classroom.

• the act of taking notes by hand allows the brain to process and organize information in ways that do not happen when notes are taken on a computer;

• possession of a computer by students (without special needs) in the classroom invariably results in the user multitasking (email, eBay, Instagram, shopping) which takes attention away from the content of the lecture; and

• even the presence of computers in use within the field of vision of students not using computers reduces the amount learned by the non-user.

That said, some schools and organizations ban computers in the classroom, some don’t. Accommodation for special needs students can raise issues of privacy as well as ”fairness” as perceived by students without special needs.

In my experience, banning electronics sends you down the rabbit hole of monitoring and attempting to discipline students who are determined to have it their way, even if they know their use will lessen their learning.

Save yourself the hassle and the formal complaints, but try not to allow students who choose not use the devices to have their learning negatively impacted. Allow students who do not use computers to sit where they are not disturbed if they so choose.

<https://ctl.yale.edu/Using-Electronic-Devices-in-Class>

<https://www.brookings.edu/research/for-better-learning-in-college-lectures-lay-down-the-laptop-and-pick-up-a-pen/>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> The course is fairly small, with fewer than 30 students. We will spend most of the time in the course listening to students presenting their ideas, and the students critiquing and giving feedback on other students' presentations.
>
>
>

Banning electronic devices can simulate cases where such devices are forbidden/inaccessible for a real reason. In such cases you cannot easily google the answer up.

As [jaia](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/101450/9200) allready noted, explain your reasons in the syllable clearly and leave options for those who must use ellectronic devices.

As I understood your desription, the course is focused on learning how to criticise someone's work and how to respond to a critique. There is no need of using electronic devices at all (except for people with special needs).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: From my experience as a student, I would suggest you don't.
Simply call it out at the very beginning of the seminar, day 1 you introduce yourself in a loud, clear tone, then say that you don't like seeing people distracted by technology.

Mention that this is especially because it distracts those around them as well, and could you all please leave the phone in the pocket, save for those that are actually typing away notes on a laptop just please focus on the seminar.

That has the highest rate of success by far and you still come off as professional and friendly. If you see someone smiling at their phone, just politely call ask them to focus (so whole room can hear that) and after 1-2 such callouts everyone gets the idea that they will be humiliated if they do this, and they will stop unless they're rude morons. At that stage, let it go. Need to treat people like adults, if they want to come in and waste their time that's their loss, just don't let them get in the way of others who are there to learn.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: **Why do you want to ban electronic devices?**

**A.** You do it for the sake of those (~20%) students that **use** laptops etc - you believe this will help them concentrate, study better, understand the material, provide fewer distractions etc.

*or*

**B.** You do it for the sake of the other (~80%) students, that currently **do not use** devices - you hope that this will lead to more participation, improve the quality of the lecture etc.

If the answer is A, then just **don't**. You do not know what's best for them, and I'm assuming they are old enough to make their own decisions (yes, even if they will fail the class).

On the other hand, if the answer is B, I suggest you talk to the students during the first lesson, explaining your reasoning (maybe suggest that it's also polite to listen to other students talking/presenting and not use a device at this time; and/or tell them to sit in the back if they intend to use a laptop). Afterwards, **ask** the students to *minimize* electronic devices use and leave it at that. Do not try to enforce anything - this isn't elementary school.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: As a professor teaching a class, and - by extension - a former student, I'll give a few reasons why I will *never* ban electronics/laptops in my class, even if they're classes that don't need them (banning laptops in a class about computational public health is a tall order).

**Potentially Singling Out Students with Disabilities**: There are students who use laptops as assistive devices. Even with a "ban", you'll likely have to make an accommodation for these students. Which means in the class anyone who does have a laptop will be assumed to have a disability. I'm not interested in making life harder for my students who are already struggling.

**Being Able to Bring Laptops to Class Changed my Life**: I'm not actually exaggerating with this. For my *entire* life, I have not been able to stay awake in lectures. Ever. Doesn't matter how interesting the subject is. What fixed that? Being able to take a laptop to class.

Which is more distracting and disrespectful - me occasionally doing something on a screen that's not laser focused on you, or me asleep in the back? Which will result in me missing more content?

**They're Adults**: They can make their own decisions about how they approach their class work.

>
> I have noticed that I work better without electronic devices because I
>  am less distracted and can focus better. Consequently, I would hope to
>  minimize the distractions faced by students by disallowing students in
>  the course to use any electronic devices.
>
>
>

What works better for you is not what works better for everyone. For example, I retain information better if I *don't* take notes at all. But I'm not going to ban note taking.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_13: I wouldn't recommend banning laptops outright as a global course policy, because:

1. Many students *need* electronic devices to accommodate learning disabilities. Laying down a coursewide ban would prevent them from doing so, which is not what you want (and probably against university policy).
2. Many students who may not *need* laptops still work better with them due to the affordances they provide, such as digital ink (on Surface devices, tablets, and some Chromebooks) and the ability to store their notes in the cloud.
3. The research you cited from UT-Austin, indeed almost all the research claiming negative effects of laptops on student classroom performance, is situated in the context of lecture pedagogy. Your seminar is not (I hope!) going to use lecture often or at all, so that research doesn't really apply to your case. In fact you can imagine situations where having laptops available could really help in a seminar class in terms of searching up information and so on.
4. In fact if you scratch the surface on a lot of these ban-the-laptop articles, there is either no mention of pedagogy whatsoever (so, just immediately ignore the results) or it assumes you are just lecturing. In the latter case, the results of the studies may be true, but you could make an equal case that *lectures* ought to be banned, not laptops.

Briefly, a better approach to technology would consist of:

* Creating a class environment and designing learning activities for students that keep them active, and so either their laptops are used as a tool for learning or else they are working hard enough on something else that screwing around on a laptop isn't a viable option for them. And,
* Rather than banning, work with the students (maybe on the first day of class) to come up with some reasonable boundaries for acceptable/unacceptable use. Like anything else, when the students have some ownership on the rules then they are a lot more likely to follow them.

I wrote a bit more about all this at my blog here: <http://rtalbert.org/laptop-bans-and-assumptions/>

<NAME> also has a great article about this here: <https://michellemillerphd.com/addiction-accommodation-and-better-solutions-to-the-laptop-problem/>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Don't ban the electronic devices, ban the distractions.

Laptops and the like can have useful features (like note taking) which shouldn't be taken foregranted because they can actually help students.

Instead you should look into how viable it would be to block distracting websites like the most common social media websites - facebook, twitter et cetera.

If a student tries to get on social media, only to receive a page from the university saying "This site is blocked, get back to work", it'll hopefully discourage them from distractions.

It won't eliminate distractions but it'll make it marginally harder for students to get distracted, and it'll certainly make them think twice about focusing on the seminar.

---

Ideally it would be possible to block all internet connections within the room to stop people using the internet during the seminar, but that may not be a viable option.

(And to pre-empt the "what if someone wants to look up a definition or something?" - doing so would also be a distraction. If someone doesn't understand some terminology they should ask the teacher as soon as possible. There may be more than one student that doesn't understand the term, so it could be more beneficial to ask outright anyway, than to have 4 students silently googling a term while the lecture runs on and they start missing bits.)
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: I submitted an article to a journal, and it was rejected. The reviewers criticised some configuration values I used in my software. The comments were very helpful.

I have since improved the software, re-run the experiments, and extensively rewritten the article. I plan to submit it to the same journal. I suspect there's a good chance it will go to some of the same reviewers.

The controversial configuration parameters are no longer needed, and so are not mentioned in the article. I'm worried that if the reviewers saw the earlier version of the article, they may be confused by the "missing" parameters.

For this reason, I am tempted to include a note explaining the change. Is this a reasonable thing to do, or would it seem amateurish? Would it be better to just communicate this to the editor instead of including a note in the submission itself?<issue_comment>username_1: When resubmitting a paper after rejection, many journals require the authors to provide a detailed response to reviewers, whether or not the paper is going to be assessed by the same reviewers.

Therefore, instead of including a note to explain the change, include a complete response to reviewers, even though the journal you are submitting to does not require it. It would be useful even if the reviewers are not the same, because it's quite likely that new reviewers will receive the initial comments.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In case you do not resubmit to the same journal (in which case your cover letter could contain these notes), but rather to a different journal or to a conference (since you seem to be working on topics that intersect with computer science):

You can always add notes to the reviewers to your document. I have done so multiple times for conference submissions in CS, once even with adding a cover sheet to a conference submission requesting the reviewers to look in the appendix to see if some of their points of criticism are addressed. I've never received negative comments about this.

**However**, doing so risks a comment by the reviewer that the information in the notes is so essential that it should be in the paper. So this strategy only makes sense if you can give reasons that make it 100% clear that the content from the notes to the reviewers should not be in the paper.

The cover sheet mentioned above may look weird, but the first section in your appendix being titled "Notes to the Reviewers" should not. However, some conferences employ automatic length checking of the paper and take this appendix into account, so you can only use this strategy if your paper is short enough with the notes.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **If this is not a resubmission you do not need to add any note.** The paper should be self-standing and if these parameters are not used than there is no need to mentioned that they were in the previous model. The only parameters of interests are the ones being used, unless you are doing a comparative study or improving upon a previous model, in that case you would have to explain why you are not using these parameters. As long as you support all of your parameter choices you do not need to explain what you did before.

**If you submit to the same journal** after having received permission from the editor, than **briefly state the main changes you have made**, but again, **the paper should be self standing**.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Even if you don't call it a resubmission, if its going back to the same journal, it is indeed a resubmission. Even after an extensive rewrite. This is a common occurrence.

I'm sure as part of the application they will ask if you have previously submitted this work to this journal and ask for the manuscript number. In doing so everyone will know its a resubmission. It will probably go back to the same editor who will obviously recognize the work. And probably back to the same group of reviewers.

This means that you include with it, a response to reviewers. If the comments no longer apply due to the rewrite, then simply state that as your response.

The hard part will be convincing the editor that your paper is worth another look. In your cover letter you tell them how helpful the reviewers comments were and that you made significant changes to the software and the manuscript text to address the concerns. If you ignore the fact that your work was previously reviewed they might just reject it based on that. You want to make it easy for them to accept your work, not hard.

Including a response to reviewers makes your submission **stronger**, not weaker.
Upvotes: 3


<issue_start>username_0: As a part of my research project, I am almost finished a first paper. I was proud of myself because of the contributions: I was able to take some ideas that has been used in the field for some years now, and I provided a unified point of view. However, as it turned out, some of those results had been already obtained before. Nevertheless, this results seems to be unknown yet in the community of the field.

A very important conference is coming up, in which the main leaders on the topic will be present. My supervisor wants me to give a talk about my results in this event. Given the fact that a few of these results had been already obtained (and of course, I am not taking credit for this), the paper with only my contributions (discarding what was done before) is not a strong paper. Although my supervisor thinks it is OK, I am afraid that giving this talk in front of these experts will result in them not taking me seriously as a researcher in the future. What are your thoughts on that?<issue_comment>username_1: Answer inspired by @Roland's comment.

First of all, have a little faith in yourself, your supervisor seems to believe your work is good enough and so should you.

Otherwise, if you really do have some doubts about the relevance of the paper you can stress the fact that these results seem to be unknown in the community.

Raise awareness on the fact that your project is interesting and that some work and results have already been made, yet seem to have passed under the radar of many.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I like the answer by @username_1 but I want to introduce another factor to consider, and that is the *scoop factor*.

Are you planning to continue working in this area? Do you think that identifying this area as insufficiently mined creates a special opportunity for you to build on what's been done previously, to come up with something novel, original and worthwhile? If so, you might want to play your cards closer to your chest, and wait before going so public.

If, on the other hand, you just want to see other people build on what's been done so far, and you yourself are planning to turn your attention to other areas and problems, then there's no reason to be circumspect. In this case, go ahead and present, and get people fired up about this potentially fruitful direction!
Upvotes: 0


<issue_start>username_0: Yesterday, I sent a "cold" e-mail (i.e., an unsolicited email to someone I do not know) to inquire about whether a professor has open research positions. Today I got the reply as shown below. Obviously, it is not positive.

>
> Thank you for your interest in my lab – unfortunately while your skill set looks to be ideal for the lab – I currently do not have any positions available.
>
>
>

The answer is not very surprising. But how should I respond positively? Because we are in the same city, and probably one day I would have a chance to work in that lab.<issue_comment>username_1: There’s no need to respond.

An (uninvited) question has been asked and (kindly) answered. Answering required the professor’s time. There’s no need to follow up, because that will require more of the professor’s time.

---

>
> Obviously, [the answer] is not positive.
>
>
>

I don’t know whether you mean “the professor answered that the lab has no open research positions” or the professor does not see you as a promising candidate or similar. Regarding the latter, you should not be concerned. The professor probably receives many such requests and simply doesn’t have the time to provide lengthy replies. (That’s why I recommend not to respond.)

---

>
> Why would a professor waste their time with evaluating the suitability of a candidate if there are no positions available
>
>
>

The professor might not have even read the email, let alone evaluated the suitability of the candidate. Indeed, the professor might be using canned responses, which can be sent almost as quickly as an email can be deleted/archived and are perhaps better than non-responses.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't agree that one should not respond. It's always good to respond and appreciate the time that was spent to review your CV. I wouldn't write the email in a way that needs to be answered. But a nice email can save your CV for feature opportunities.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: That's a great answer *because he answered*.
As others said, it is a good idea to provide a concise positive answer, stating your interests in future openings: he may remember your availability in 3/6 months.
There are no opening, correct, but are you looking for a research positions? opening comes with funding, and funding come with proposals.

If I were you, I would offer to give a presentation to the group about your work done and your interests, to explore potential future collaboration (to the professor say explicitly "I can/am interested in cooperating towards applying for fundings").

Regarding your expectations (if I read them correctly)

>
> Because we are in the same city, and probably one day I would have a
> chance to work in that lab.
>
>
>

That has almost zero value in the Academia world, it may give you a bit of edge, but do not count on that. It would surely help you in visiting the group investing little time&money, maybe getting some helpful connections to other people in the professor's group.
Upvotes: 1


<issue_start>username_0: I am a professor at an academic institution in applied mathematics. Last year around summer, a Masters student in my research group wanted to switch from his supervisor towards my research interests as he became more interested in my line of work. He displayed enthusiasm during my classes with advanced, interesting questions and by coming to my office hours before mentioning that he would like to switch.

After having an extensive discussion with his supervisor, I decided to take on the student's supervision responsibilities. My student worked well on his research for the first two to three months. Given his level of enthusiasm, I expected him to continue on for a PhD with me. So, I was quite surprised when he mentioned that he wanted to end with just a Masters and not continue on to a PhD. He mentioned that he did not know what he would like to do after his Masters, and that he would just like to focus on writing a good Masters thesis for now.

Since then, I had the impression that he has not been putting in enough work every week. His work has been alright and okay and sometimes mediocre. I had the impression that he might have been working on somethings totally different which is not related to my line of work.

Wondering about his interests to guide him in the right direction, I plan to ask him about his future plans and to ask him to just write an okay thesis and put time in to work toward his future goals, be it a job or further studies. Is this the right thing to do as a supervisor? Is the student being ethical here?<issue_comment>username_1: There really might be various reasons, e.g. he might have a relationship finished recently, someone in his family might have died, he might have health problems, a depression, etc. As said in the comments, we are not machines and our personal life strongly affects our work, like it or not.

If you see that he continues to perform worse and worse, and/or his mood/attitude becomes worse, you might consider asking him if everything is fine and offer some friendly help - if you are willing to. But don't be pushy; in fact you are a stranger to him and there is no reason for him to open up before you.

Also, a master's program is something in between being just a student and starting to be a researcher - he just might need to adapt in his own way and pace.

And, finally, people are different: some do work slowly with a constant pace, some (like me) work obsessively for a few weeks/months and need later at least a few weeks of procrastination to rest, cool down and clear their mind. It's really best to allow people to work in their own, most efficient way.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Boredom may be a problem here and he has not yet learned how to cope with that.

Your job at this stage is to motivate him to do the best MSc possible for him (or at least the one that reflects his skills at their best potential). Don't worry otherwise about his future beyond that, it is not in your remit.

He may not be cut out for a PhD; or he may not be ready for it. Sometimes students go to work in industry and then come back for a PhD. If sufficiently talented, they can make amazing students: disciplined, organised, and self-motivated in addition to their academic abilities.

In short, what you need to do now is to find out how to get the student motivated for his present work. Do not try to talk about job/PhD or anything, that can be behind an insurmountable wall in the future for them, especially if they are demotivated.

He says he wants to do a Master instead of a PhD. Don't question this at this point (there can be many reasons for that), but explain that, even for a Master on its own, he would want to have a good one, since this increases his options in the future. And, since it's a far shorter route than a PhD, you can try to convince him to maintain his focus for its duration.

"Is the student ethical": well, why not? He is only damaging himself, and it is not like he is cheating - he probably does not know himself sufficiently well and overestimated his ability to sustain motivation after the switch, but it is very unlikely to assume that he wanted to cheat anyone.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, I think you're doing the right thing.

One of my service assignments is undergraduate advising in computer science at a selective school. I think my experience with undergrads may inform on what could be happening with your grad student.

All the students I encounter are smart and they're all capable of getting an A in anything if they only took one course, had someone else cooking their meals, doing their laundry and cleaning their bathroom and they actually cared about the subject.

When students don't do well, it's almost always one of two reasons. The most common is that they don't have the time, usually because they're taking too heavy a load, but sometimes due to medical, family, relationship, work or other reasons.

The second reason is they don't like what they're doing. Sometimes it was a terrible course delivered by an instructor who did a terrible job. Sometimes it's on us, but those are rare; academia doesn't run completely open loop. Those student evals actually do matter.

More often, they've been pushed into CS, often by parents, or they've pushed themselves into it. And they hate it. They feel cornered and they want out, but see no way out except to plug ahead somehow and get it over with. An example might be a student who desperately wants to be an actor but is facing threats from his father that any financial support will end if he switches to a drama major. Another may have realized the work is different than she expected and not what she wants to do with her life but believes she's sunk too much into the degree to give up now no matter how much she hates it.

A social worker friend of mine once remarked, *"People don't make changes in their lives until the pain of staying where they are is greater than the pain of changing."* And in the meantime, they struggle and they don't do well.

I'm suspicious from your description that your student has come to a realization that this just isn't what he wants to do with his life.

When I encounter students that seem to be struggling in this way (which is pretty often with UGs), it's often because they had a plan but it's not working and they don't have a new one. Asking what their plan is when they don't have one isn't as helpful as encouraging them to think about what makes them happy and what they want from life. What I've found is helpful is to ask them to watch [<NAME>'s 2005 commencement address at Stanford](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hd_ptbiPoXM) and discuss with them some advice he gives: *To do great work, you must love what you do. Don't settle. Keep looking until you find what you love. You cannot live someone else's life.*
Upvotes: 3


<issue_start>username_0: I have always loved psychology, and so I went and got a first degree in that field. However, I also loved technology (especially computers) while growing up. Unfortunately, I wasn't well-informed about university programs, and so I didn't know I could do both psychology and computer science in my undergraduate, until I was admitted and wasn't allowed by my institution to pick on new programs. So after undergraduate I decided to go on to pursue a health technology (ehealth & telemedicine) master's program, but my lack of knowledge in computer science makes me not proficient in the tech aspect of my field and limits my PhD options in that field. My ideal career move involves combining technology in my psychology professional practice. But now, I am confused as to whether I should just go on and pursue a PhD Health technology or go in for a second master's in psychology to allow me further into PhD psychology afterwards? I can't apply for PhD in psychology without a master's in that field either, but I also feel I am not growing younger anymore and so time matters, if I want to enjoy a long career before retirement then I should get a PhD soon enough. But that will mean sticking to health technology and forgoing my psychology dreams. I am really confused now. Also, is there anyway I can get into psychology and still take a course in computer science? What are my options, what should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: If it is possible to start your dream PhD without further prerequisites: **do it**. Also take notice that it'll be hard, but doable. In my opinion a second Master's has no benefit, taking the possible admission to the PhD program aside.

I know someone, who got a PhD in physics after a Master's in biology. I went to a PhD in CS after a Master's in mathematics.

(This is also a bit dependent on the field and on the social component, so please tag with a country for further answers. My experience references German system, but it *should* be generic enough for US too.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From my experiences, I would take the PhD road; being in the German and later Swiss environment.

I studied computer sciences first, and continued with a PhD on it. One of the best decisions of my life: it opened many doors. A second master can be added later, if you want. (I added an MBA some years after the PhD).
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: I received an official PhD offer from University A on Jan 30 (15 days ago).

In an interview with the faculty from University A, they asked me where A stands among my applications. I honestly replied that A was among the top 3 universities and said that I need to hear from the other two schools before making any decision. I also expressed that it would be hard for me to make the decision before hearing from the other two schools from my top 3 shortlist. The offer from A arrived soon after the interview (obviously).

Today a professor from University A sent me a very short email asking if I had questions or I was close to making decisions.

Is he implying that I should hurry up?

I have not sent them any email since the offer as I had nothing to update. The offer follows the rule of April 15, but the school would offer me a small amount of fellowship (which I don't care) if I accept before late February. The other two schools just interviewed me several days ago and I would expect to hear from them soon.

How should I politely respond?

Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: I would say you are right about your guess and he is indeed implying that you should hurry up.

If you still wait for the other responses, something like below may be a proper answer:

>
> Dear Professor Smith,
>
>
> Thank you for your kind reminder. However, as I have mentioned, I can
>  only inform you about my decision after I have answers from other
>  universities.
>
>
> I do apologize if this situation gives you inconvenience. Please feel
>  free to proceed further with your other applicants in case you need an
>  answer from me immideately.
>
>
> Best, John.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think the professor is necessarily implying that you *should* hurry up, they are simply putting pressure on you and hoping that you accept their offer, keeping open a channel for communication if you have questions (like a salesperson asking if you need any help as you are browsing a store), and trying to politely test whether you may have accepted another offer.

If you choose to go elsewhere, they likely want to know as soon as possible so they can extend an offer to another candidate.

I would say it is sufficient to respond with a brief, polite note that you decided before applying to wait for all offers before making a decision, and that you promise to inform them immediately once you have made a decision.

>
> Dr. Professor,
>
>
> I appreciate the email, I will certainly ask you if any questions come up. My plan when applying was to wait until I hear back from all institutions I interviewed at before making a decision.
>
>
> I will inform Impatient University immediately once I have made a decision, either way.
>
>
> Best,
>
>
> Prospective Student
>
>
>

Your responsibility is to inform them as quickly as is reasonable once you have made a decision, but you shouldn't be pressured to respond more quickly than you are ready.

You mention "*the school would offer me a small amount of fellowship (which I don't care) if I accept before late February*" - this is certainly against the spirit of the April 15 Resolution, though I don't know enough about the specifics of the agreement to definitively say it's disallowed. The whole point of the resolution is to not make financial offers of any sort contingent on making a hasty decision, to keep a level playing field across institutions and in the best interest of the students. That said, I wouldn't suggest bringing this up at all or making an issue of it, unless it makes you uncomfortable in which case you could certainly consider it in your decision-making process.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think that the only thing this professor is doing is "cultivating" you. And I mean that in a nice way. He's just showing that University A remains interested in you and keeping communication open. I would just thank him and maybe take advantage of his offer. The way I would take advantage of the offer is to ask if there were current grad students in program whom he could put me in contact with, so that I could chat with someone on the inside.
Upvotes: 2


<issue_start>username_0: Is it ethical if I use lecture slides of another professor and modify only 15-20% for my lecture and provide an acknowledgment at the end of lecture slides that lecture material was taken from Prof. XYZ Course ABC?
 In the given condition do I still need to send a personal email to professor to inform that I am using his/her lecture material or acknowledgement is enough?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Dear Professor,
>
>
> For the assignment for your module we were asked to produce an essay
>  of 5000 words. Here's my submission. I used the essay of another
>  student and modified 15-20% of words in it. You can find the name of
>  the student on the last page of my assignment. He produces a very good
>  piece of writing and it would be a shame not to re-use it for my
>  assignment.
>  It also saved me a lot of time, which I used for other things I enjoy doing more than working on your module.
>
>
> I hope it's fine with you.
>
>
> Best regards, your student
>
>
>

If you want to encourage such response from your students, then of course, go for it. If not, be an example and do your own preparation for your teaching.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: One of my professors did this last semester. He wrote on the *front* page of each lecture slides:

Slides originally prepared by Dr.X
Modified and edited by Dr.HisName

I think this is better than an acknowledgement at the end and that there's no problem with this approach.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The question is: why wouldn't you send an e-mail? Consider you send him/her an email for permission to use the lectures, he/she may:

1. (most likely) Accept your request providing you reference him/her. He/she might even point some possible errors in the slides.
2. Deny your request. In that case you just avoided an awkard situation, would he/she ever find you plagiarized (if you modifications don't change the style).

If he/she denies, should you still use his/her slides as a guideline (assuming you do the slides yourself)? Yes you can. And if you wish you can also reference him/her as a reference, in the same way you reference books.
Upvotes: 3


<issue_start>username_0: As a Ph.D. student, I am curious about the following: if you collaborate with a researcher(not necessarily your advisor) while being a student, should you write in your dissertation the work of the other collaborator?

Assume that while being a student, you collaborate with Prof. X, and you write a paper together. In this paper, the work was split 50-50, so that half of the results belong to Prof. X.

What should you do when writing your dissertation? Most probably, omitting the results of Prof. X will result in a significant gap in the thesis. I am particularly interested in the case of mathematics: if I cite the result, should I give a proof?<issue_comment>username_1: The short answer: Yes. However, it may depend on several details. In my case, I did include results from a collaborator in my thesis and that was generally accepted. I was however asked to provide an acknowledgement section where I had to clarify which results were done by me and which by the collaborator. Also, my thesis was in organic chemistry so things might be different in mathematics. So while I can't say if it is common or not in mathematics, I can tell you that it was allowed in my case.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I had a similar situation in my thesis, in math. The third chapter was based on a work that was jointly done with another researcher, a professor from another university. (In the end the paper we published was even with two other researchers, as we decided to join our efforts.)

1. I had to ask the researcher for permission to include our joint results. This is a no-brainer (though of course he was happy to let me do it). When I sent out the thesis to my committee (of which he was part), I also sent him a copy beforehand and asked him if he was okay with what I had written, as they were his results too and he might want to check that I didn't mangle them before releasing them into the wild. My advisor also was on board from the start, but I imagine that you have to ask for permission if this isn't the case.
2. I had to include acknowledgments for this in my thesis. Basically, I wrote a paragraph at the beginning of the chapter, stating "this chapter is based on joint work with [...]". Again, this is a no-brainer. I cannot claim all the results are due to me if they aren't. However, I didn't say anything of the sort "I did X% of the work and the other researcher did (100-X)% of the work", this isn't how it works, and it would have been in rather poor taste. At least in mathematics, it's expected that co-authors contribute roughly the same amount of work to a joint paper, but it's not an exact "50-50" (or 33-33-33, or 25-25-25-25...) distribution.
3. The whole thesis had to be written by me, in my own words, including the results and the proofs that were actually due to the other professor. Moreover, I obviously had to perfectly understand, and be able to explain, and defend, all the results, as if they were mine.

All of this was explained to me by my advisor. It's possible that regulations in your university say something different. The essential part, I believe, which is only hinted at in the steps above, is to ask your advisor what to do exactly.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It is completely normal to include in your thesis work that was done in collaboration. Almost every PhD thesis in STEM subjects includes at least some collaborative work, simply because your PhD itself is a collaboration between you and your advisor.

Usually, you just need to clearly state what work in your thesis was done in collaboration and with whom. It may also be expected that joint work should be put in your own words, rather than just copied from the paper. That's good practice anyway, since it's a great way to make sure you really understand the work. And you'll need to understand it because you can be examined on anything that's in your thesis.

Check your individual university's regulations for the precise details. And ask your advisor – this stuff is literally their job.

>
> Assume that while being a student, you collaborate with Prof. X, and you write a paper together. In this paper, the work was split 50-50, so that half of the results belong to Prof. X.
>
>
>

That simply isn't how collaboration works in mathematics. The results "belong to" all the authors, because they came from a creative process that heavily involved all of them. Of course, some parts of the work will be solely by one person sitting in their office with a cup of coffee until they figure it out on their own, but it's mostly not like that. And usually, even these "solo results" receive at least some contributions from the other authors as the paper gets written and rewritten. And, very often, even if it was Author A who came up with the actual proof, Authors B and C were part of the process that led to that particular technique being chosen, and so on.

Of course, there are some exceptions. Sometimes, an author joins a collaboration late because their expertise on some area is needed. In computer science, papers are often released first as a shortened conference version (which is a peer-reviewed publication, unlike in mathematics) and later, the full version appears in a journal. I'm aware of papers where extra authors have been added to the journal version because of specific contributions they made after the conference. I guess the closest analogue in mathematics would be a paper going up on the ArXiv and then acquiring extra authors. If an author in that situation was a PhD student, I'd expect their thesis to include only a high-level summary of the material that existed before they joined the project.

The fundamental rule is honesty. If you can put your hand on your heart and say that you made significant contributions to the work and you're clear about who else contributed, it's almost certainly fine. If you're including big chunks of stuff that you made no significant contribution to, I'd hope you already know that it's wrong to say "I did this."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: In addition to the accurate answers so far, it's worth pointing out that the **order of the author list** matters in some fields: The first author is generally assumed to be the lead author, that is, the author who contributed most. In these fields it can be the case that lead authorship is required for claiming a paper for your PhD thesis.

Details may depend on the institution. For example, at the institution where I did my PhD, the regulations explicitely required three papers with me as the lead author for a cumulative PhD. A colleague of mine, who collaborated in a group where authors were always listed alphabetically, had a statement in his thesis where he assured that he was the de-facto lead author of his papers.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: In our country, the Higher Education Commission requires a student to publish at least one paper in any well-reputed journal (IMPACT FACTOR or MASTER LIST JOURNAL) with lead authorship. However, there is no such restriction on including papers into thesis with multiple contributors.

In my personal opinion, I humbly suggest that a written consent of the co-authors should be obtained. To me, it sounds good both ethically and to be on a safer side. Also, the rules of the university matters, if they are silent then go ahead but atleast get a written consent of the co-authors for dealing with any possible future issues.

Hope this helps

-- username_5
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: The instructions when I did my thesis were to just be clear about contributions from other people. I had 5 or 6 pieces and really 3 of them needed to fit together like a triangle. One of those 3 was mostly done by a visiting summer scholar. I got him started and did some measurements, but he took his "triangle leg" and drove it himself.

I always considered it part of my original domain so I wanted it in there. Plus you would have had a logical content gap if you omitted it. I just wrote a sentence or two paragraph (in italics, in main text) at the front of the relevant chapter. I think this was adequate. Being upfront and explanatory. But didn't require some long, precise allocation of every detail. Just the basic explanation that I gave you here. There was still "plenty of work" where I was the main driver so it was not an issue.

We had already co-published the "triangle leg" separately as a regular journal article. Visiting scholar taken care of (put as first author of that leg).

It is very normal that people work in collaborations (especially in experimental science) and that different students need to write up their theses in addition to regular journal articles. Just be upfront about what you did (don't say you fabricated samples if you did measurements or visa versa).

I am not used to some big signoff from the collaborators. They just wish you well. It is a good touch to give them a copy of the thesis (electronic or spiral bound, bound volume not required) so that they can learn from it, benefit from it, retain it for insights for themselves. Sometimes theses go into a bit more detail or are better explanations than terse journal reports.

If you are STILL worried, just notify him of your plans (going to have our collaboration as chapter 3, will credit you). Collaborator can squawk if he wants. (Unlikely, he will wish you well instead.) Uh...just don't try to get him to help you write thesis or the like...it's your glorified term paper, not his school assignment. He will be journal article driven.
Upvotes: 0