date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2012/04/04 | 442 | 1,819 | <issue_start>username_0: I've been maintaining a great GPA in a specialization undergraduate program, am planning on taking the MCAT this summer, and have been looking into some volunteering/internship opportunities. Are there any other special precautions that I should be taking to increase the likelihood of my acceptance into med school? Are med schools looking for anything in particular for admissions? An all-encompassing, comprehensive answer would be appreciated, but any advice or tips are appreciated :).<issue_comment>username_1: It would be a good idea to seek info from those that might know, such as:
* <http://www.aspiringdocs.org/faqs/preparing/>
* <http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/education-careers/becoming-physician/medical-school/preparing-medical-school.page>
* <https://www.aamc.org/students/considering/gettingin/>
This site is aimed at questions about Academia, I can see how you might think this would be an appropriate place, but the sites listed above should directly answer your questions.
Have you spent time with some of your local medical professionals, found out about their jobs, their specialties? Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Speaking from (1) experience applying and talking to applications officers, and (2) knowing doctors who take part in the admissions process, I would suggest that the ideal medical student would appear as follows:
* Any major, but very high grades in all pre-med courses
* Very high MCAT score
* Experience working in a hospital *or* medical research lab, with demonstrated results (good recommendations from doctors and published papers, respectively)
* Very personable during the interview, well-liked by all interviewers
None of these should be a surprise; they just want awesome, academic students.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2012/04/05 | 920 | 3,931 | <issue_start>username_0: I would like to present some classic computer science papers in a class I am teaching. I know teachers usually assign papers before the lecture, but I can't figure out how to present material they've already read and likely understood. In the case of a highly technical paper, I'd go over the more technical portions, perhaps letting them know beforehand not to struggle with the proofs, programming examples, etc., but I'm thinking of less technical papers, such as:
* [Reflections on Trusting Trust](http://cm.bell-labs.com/who/ken/trust.html) by <NAME>
* [The Cathedral and the Bazaar](http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/homesteading/) by <NAME>
* [No Silver Bullet](http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~cah/G51ISS/Documents/NoSilverBullet.html) by <NAME>
While I don't need to use pure lecture format, I am not sure that discussion would work well, since some of the papers (such as "Reflections on Trusting Trust") aren't really discussable, and my students lack the experience to discuss others (such as "No Silver Bullet").
EDIT: I was hoping not to task the students with extra prep, since they already have a lot of assignments to do, but, as some of you suggest, that may be the best way.<issue_comment>username_1: One possibility is to ask the *students* to present.
1. It gives an opportunity for the students to practice presenting *something*.
2. Sitting from the audience point-of-view with (I expect) expert knowledge, you will be at a great vantage point for judging whether the students fully comprehend the paper and whether they are focusing on the "correct things". Sometimes students spend too much time tracking down irrelevant details and miss the big picture.
3. Sometimes (depend on local culture etc.) students are more likely to engage in discussion and ask detailed questions if it is their peer doing the presentation. (The "intimidated by the professor effect".)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I recommend the discussion format. The two downsides of it you list can be overcome by using a **guided discussion**. When you assign the paper, also include a list of questions that you expect the students to be able to answer after having read the paper. When the class meets:
1. Select students at random (or through a random permutation).
2. Have the student answer an assigned question as a discussion seed.
3. Open up the floor to other students to make comments and pitch in their ideas (thus starting a discussion).
4. When the topic dies down, move to the next question on the assigned list and repeat from step 1.
This format has several advantages:
* It ensures that the students have read the paper (since they might get randomly selected)
* It encourages them to think of their own answers and participate in discussions.
* It eliminates the intimidating factor of the professor having tight control of the discussion (since you only moderate who speaks)
* It lets you address the key points of the paper (through your initial selection of questions) without having to go over the whole paper in class.
I have experienced this format in upper level undergrad/grad courses during my undergrad and enjoyed it greatly. It really encouraged me to read papers and reflect on them carefully.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I propose the presentation format as well but rather than have the students present from anything, maybe have a pool they can choose from or assign topics? With regards to the discussion format, sometimes it can devolve into only a few of the students talking spiritedly while the rest are confused or bored.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Usually I start by asking the students some simple questions about the paper. After a few questions I am so confident that most of them understand almost nothing about the paper, that I feel comfortable presenting it as if they never read it...
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/05 | 1,202 | 5,270 | <issue_start>username_0: Assume one or more undergraduate students are given a topic by an academic supervsior to use for their undergraduate honors thesis. The task is designed, programmed and set-up by the supervisor, who shows the students how to use the equipment and to conduct rudimentary data analysis/summaries. The students then collect the data and report them in a written, submitted thesis. Later, the academic supervisor analyses the data (from the summaries obtained), writes a manuscript in conjunction with his/her colleagues, and wishes to submit for publication. My question is: should the undergraduates who collected the data, and who did not contribute to the writing of the manuscript at all, be listed as authors? It seems that this decision is often left to personal preference. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: If the student (or anybody else for that matter) did not make a novel and significant intellectual contribution to the project, then they should not be included on the author list of the paper. In your question, it seems like all the intellectual contribution was by the professor (and colleagues) and the students just carried out tasks assigned to them or made very minor contributions. As such, the students should be mentioned in the **acknowledgement section** but not given authorship.
That being said, if your supervisor is only using you for drill work, then maybe you should seek a better supervisor. A good supervisor should encourage their students to take an active role of novel intellectual contribution. If your supervisor is not encouraging you to do this, then they are not training you to be a researcher, they are training you to be a lab-hand (although I guess in some fields you have to be a lab-hand before you are can be trained as a researcher).
Here is the [flip side of this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/644/66), in particular my answer is inspired by [@JeffE's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/651/66).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Given that the students did not participate in writing the paper, I agree with username_1 that they should not be named as authors.
It is good scientific practice to only put an author's name on a paper if she or he has at least read the complete paper before publication and can judge its correctness. After all, each author is responsible for any misrepresentations in the paper.
However, they definitely should appear in the acknowledgement section.
(Our lab has the informal policy that we ask students who contributed somehow to a research project if they want to take part in the paper-writing process. In this case, they are named as authors, otherwise mentioned in the acknowledgements section.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Reading your original question, the scenario you describe makes this situation a little more complex.
If the paper is written in such a way as to draw significantly on the work reported in the thesis—to the extent of using figures and data prepared by the student, then one could very well make the argument that the student should be cited as an author. This is especially true if the supervisor uses any of the text in the construction of his paper.
More generally, I try to use the criterion that my postdoc advisor gave me: if someone believes that their contributions to the research are significant enough to merit co-authorship, then they should contribute to the writing and revising of the manuscript. At that point, they become fully entitled to co-authorship.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A few comments:
1. Were they asked to contribute to the paper or was the paper written without their knowledge? If they refused to contribute, then they shouldn't be a named author. If they weren't asked, then it's not their fault they didn't contribute ;)
2. I think the word *undergraduate* is a red herring. Substitute it with the word *PhD student* or *RA* or *Prof from the lab next door*, does this change your view? A person's title shouldn't influence their inclusion.
3. How much work are we talking about here? When I provide statistical advice, I'm happy to give up a few hours of my time for free. But once I'm spending days on the project, then I expect (and make it clear) to be am named author.
4. If data collection was "trivial", then I would suggest it shouldn't be used as an undergraduate project. Also, I presume that there was some skill in collecting the data?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: The consensus (of course no such thing exists) that I have heard in the biological science goes, if your data resulted in a figure, you get your name on the paper. However, if the person wrote the paper and contributed immensely, they then get the first authorship,
I think part of the question is based on whether or not the ideas of the thesis were influential in the interpretation of the data and if the data had to be recollected. In the situation described our field would be very comfortable with having the undergrad in the middle, the least important position of authorship.
It is very important to acknowledge @JeffE's comment which is "**the correct answer depends on the standard publication culture in the supervisor's field**"
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/05 | 1,512 | 6,692 | <issue_start>username_0: Many people complain about Elsevier and over eight thousand are [boycotting it](http://thecostofknowledge.com), but actual solutions seem hard to find for certain fields- I'm thinking of research areas for which an Elsevier journal is very important and funds are not available to subsidize an open-access journal.
How can we move an Elsevier-dependent research community to a less objectionable, more open publisher?
I'll post a partial possible answer myself; I'm asking because I think we need more/better answers than mine.<issue_comment>username_1: First one must assess whether researchers in the area agree that the community should leave Elsevier. If there isn't strong support for leaving Elsevier, then any move is likely to fail, as it will probably involve a new venture (such as a new journal) requiring the support of many, many researchers in the area, perhaps as authors, editors, or readers pressuring their university to subscribe to the new journal. If the research community is not supportive, this may because they have very good reasons or it may be out of ignorance / lack of imagination of the alternatives.
Discussion of the possibilities in your researcher community serves to explore the options, educate, and potentially build support. You may be able to start a discussion of the issues on mailing lists, social media, or run a [conference symposium/satellite](http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenVisionScience) related to this topic.
If there is community support, there are a few possibilities for actually making the move. In most (all?) cases, Elsevier owns the journal and its name, therefore one cannot simply switch publishers and keep the same journal name. As a work-around, moves have occurred when all or most of the members of editorial boards of Elsevier journals [resigned and started a new journal](http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Journal_declarations_of_independence), usually issuing an open letter explaining their action and encouraging the community to submit to and subscribe to the new journal.
A new journal can use the traditional subscription model or be open access.
With a subscription model, one can use a traditional publisher- a non-profit university press may be less objectionable than Elsevier or one of the other mega-profitable corporate publishers. I have [started a list of possible publishers](http://openwetware.org/wiki/OpenVisionScience#Publishing_Solutions-_subscription_model). To get started with a new publisher, one must convince them that they will make enough from subscriptions for the new journal to be worth their while. This may be difficult, as new journals are frequently risky. It takes a few years for a journal to receive an impact factor, and may also take years to be indexed by the major databases, and many authors will only submit to journals that have already achieved these things.
An open-access journal can use the author-pays model, in which case a large publisher can provide all the traditional services (manuscript submission software system and reviewing workflow management, layout, copyediting, production, webhosting, accounting, exporting to databases, DOI registration, proper metadata, etc.) or it can be run on a shoestring, with academics handling everything perhaps with a few administrative staff. For research communities willing to submit all their manuscripts in LateX, this is quite feasible but for communities that demand layout (figures and text arranged to fit a standard page appearance and possibly typesetting) be done, this is more labor-intensive.
Several open-source software tools assist in publishing journals. Open Journal Systems is most like a traditional journal publishing platform but I hear it may be difficult for academics to use. Annotum is based on Wordpress and I believe it works by having authors write their manuscript directly in its software, so that it can guarantee that the paper will look exactly as you expect it (WYSIWYG). It is used by PLoS Currents and other journals. All of these tools could probably use more skilled programmmers contributing to the project.
I am only a researcher, not a publisher, so perhaps not everything I have written here is correct. I think we researchers are in particular need of estimates of the person-hours needed to publish and manage a journal by various methods, so that a research community considering a move can budget appropriately / be comfortable knowing what they're getting into.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As a publisher who has launched an OA journal and seen what it takes to do so, I see the biggest problem for starting any journal being lack of an [Impact Factor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor) (IF). I've polled authors at ECVP and about 90% said IF is what determined where they submitted. Everyone knows why this is, so why don't academics turn inward and try to undermine this reliance on IFs? Doing so would insert true competition into the journals market. Maybe academics have tried to do this, though I've never read of any real substantial attempts. I could be wrong. The second problem after IF and before funding is loyalty. Ed board members are often tied to multiple journals and in those first few years you really need those big names on your board to commission for the journal. Big names often care more about another journal or just don't care.
You need a publisher, be it nonprofit or profit, that can put in the work to promote the journal and help commission. Financially, OA journals are very easy to start. Subscription journals require more financial backing, which perhaps could be gotten through grants if you don't want to be tied to a commercial publisher. The answer is long and requires lots of discussion and more important, commitment.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It occurs to me that in our field (vision science), Journal of Vision already is an open access alternative to Vision Research. I haven't noticed a big difference in quality or acceptance rates between the two journals, they publish at a similar rate (JoV=270, VR=252 articles in 2011) and their impact factors are within 0.5 of each other. Also, around a third of the VR editorial board are also on the JoV board, and <NAME> is about to transition from VR editor in chief to JoV editor in chief. Given these similarities, I guess the fact that the whole field hasn't abandoned VR suggests that people still feel there is a place for it. Or, from the other perspective, the success of JoV shows that lots of people wanted an open access alternative, and it's great that they now have one. {reposted from Google+}
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/05 | 1,451 | 5,925 | <issue_start>username_0: To quote Thomsons "a journal's [Impact factor](http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/academic/impact_factor/)
is calculated by dividing the number of current year citations to the source items published in that journal during the previous two years."
I assume that disciplines vary in
* **average number of citations per paper**: Disciplines with fewer citations per paper will appear to have less impact.
* **citation half-life**: Longer half-lives means under-estimation of impact relative to journals with shorter half-lives. The [Wikipedia article on impact factors](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor) summarises a study that found that "the percentage of total citations occurring in the first two years after publication varies highly among disciplines from 1-3 percent in the mathematical and physical sciences to 5-8 percent in the biological sciences." (Nierop, 2009).
Google Scholar uses the five year **h-index**. See this listing of [top ranked journals with various psychology related keywords in their title](http://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&view_op=search_venues&vq=psychology+OR+psychological+OR+cognitive+OR+cognition). The five year h-index indicates the number of papers with an equivalent number of citations. E.g., a value of 20 indicates that 20 articles published in the last five years have received 20 or more citations.
However, while the h-index might reduce the issue of different citation half-lives, it does not resolve it. And it does not address the issue of differential citation patterns across disciplines.
### Question
**What index provides both a reliable and unbiased assessment of the citation based impact of a journal when comparisons are being performed across disciplines?**
### Reference
* <NAME> (2009). "Why do statistics journals have low impact factors?". Statistica Neerlandica 63 (1): 52–62. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9574.2008.00408.x.<issue_comment>username_1: Moving from comments:
Defining field boundaries is an extremely difficult problem. Once those boundaries are defined (or as they are being defined) it is also difficult to judge which field individual journals belong to. The technical problem is one of "community-structure" or cluster detection, and is a big problem in computer science.
For the specific case of journals and citations, there is some cool work on this via statistical properties of random walks that [makes nice definitions using the map-equation](http://www.eigenfactor.org/map/maps.php). However, these statistical methods sometimes produce oddities (I think I remember seeing Phys. Rev. Letters being classified as Chemistry based on the stats). It also doesn't always produce the fine-gaining desired, for instance eigenfactor seems to not have a Cognitive Science category, just a general Psychology category.
In general, I recommend taking a look around [eigenfactor](http://www.eigenfactor.org/). Note that the website claims eigenfactor and article influence scores adjust for different fields, already (take a look at [point #4](http://www.eigenfactor.org/whyeigenfactor.php)). I am not sure how accurate this claim is, but I personally find their metric more reliable (not to mention more accessible!) than ISI Web of Science. I also think their approach is more developed than the freshly-pressed Google Scholar journal rankings based on h5-index. However, I would love to see eigenfactor and Google Scholar together.
If you are unsatisfied with eigenfactor's rankings, then a naive metric might be: classify journals into their fields and then assign each a ranking p, meaning the journal is in top p% of its field by some standard metric. This should give you a rough idea.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no such index.
Publication and citation standards vary significantly between disciplines and even sub-disciplines. Without direct, deep knowledge of the standards in each community, it is simply impossible to compare impact of a journal in field X with the impact of a journal in field Y. (Eigenfactor's extraordinary claims to the contrary require extraordinary evidence, which they don't provide.)
Moreover, it's not clear why you should even try. Any judgement about the relative importance of Journal of X versus Journal of Y necessarily requires a **prior** judgement about the relative importance of *field* X versus *field* Y. HC SVNT DRACONES.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The CWTS SNIP factor controls for differing disciplinary citation rates and speed. See <http://www.journalindicators.com> It is also shown in Scopus
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Here's an informal and difficult to quantify one: does it suffice to have a publication in this journal to get tenured? Or, in a reverse manner, can one get tenured without having published in a journal like this?
* In economics, you will get tenure in most reasonable places for publications in *Quarterly Journal of Economics, American Economic Review,* or *Econometrica*.
* In statistics, these would be *Annals of Statistics, Annals of Applied Statistics, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B Methodology, the Journal of the American Statistical Association*, and *Biometrika*.
These are the fields I am closely familiar with. I can imagine that in most natural sciences, a publication in *Nature* or *Science* would boost your chances quite a bit. Finance has a system of ranking journals, with a handful of highly coveted journals designated as A-journals.
Getting reliable statistics along these lines is of course impossible. If Google were a little smarter, it would scan the CVs of those tenured and untenured (those who moved to another university after the typical period of 5-6-7 years), grab their publication records, and see what the journals are that those who got tenured had published in that untenured hadn't.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/05 | 872 | 3,840 | <issue_start>username_0: Assume that the student (during his PhD) is faced with a problem which he and his advisor are both completely new to. The advisor is **trying to** help the student but owing to his lack of experience/knowledge/intuition in the field, is unable to help much. What is the etiquette for the student to seek external help (particularly professors who have dealt with such problems and maybe their grad students)?
* Is it necessary to inform your advisor before going to other professors for help?
* How should one introduce the subject of external help when the advisor is clearly interested in tackling the problem without any help?<issue_comment>username_1: You absolutely should inform your advisor that you are going to seek external help, even if they are against it. They are partly responsible for your studies and should know what's going on.
You could try introducing the subject as a collaboration rather than seeking help. If the person you want to approach has written a paper on the subject for example, you could say that it would be beneficial for your work to collaborate with them. As long as you at least create the impression that you're looking for interaction on the same level rather than just getting advice, I don't think you would have too much trouble convincing your advisor.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The cardinal rule of interacting with advisors is that if you don't generally trust your advisor's advice, then you need a new advisor. So you should start with the idea that your advisor's approach to any given situation is probably worth trying, and only give up on it if it's clearly not working out or seems contrary to what everyone else is saying.
Beyond that, I'm sure it varies between fields. I wouldn't presume to offer advice to someone in a biology lab on how to sort this issue out, for example.
The most important thing, which you absolutely must do no matter what, is to inform your advisor in detail of any help you receive. This is a matter of intellectual honesty, while everything else is a matter of convention or wise strategy.
What you want to avoid is the following scenario: you meet with X, then meet with Y and explain what X said, then meet with X and convey Y's response to X's ideas, then meet with Y again and relay information back from X, etc. If you try this and are a little vague about the line between your own ideas and what you learned in your last meeting, then you can pull it off for a while, but eventually you'll be in big trouble when X and Y talk. Even if you never actually lied, but just let people assume you were contributing more than you actually did, they'll be very unhappy if they decide you weren't contributing enough. [And this can be a particular danger for students: if someone says something cryptic and then you figure it out later, is that because you are adding new ideas and insights, or because you are catching up to where the expert already was? It can be hard for a beginner to judge, and this potential for confusion is a valid worry for advisors.]
As to how to introduce the idea to an advisor who resists getting outside help, the main thing is to understand why. Is it because your advisor feels this is an important learning experience for you? Is the advisor convinced that the problem is not as difficult as you fear? (And, if so, can you make a compelling case that it is?) There are also more worrisome scenarios. For example, maybe the local expert in this area is notorious for competing with or undermining students, or has a bad relationship with your advisor. Your advisor may be reluctant to say this explicitly, so if he/she seems to be ruling out a natural collaborator for unclear reasons, then you should ask about other people you might talk with instead.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/06 | 796 | 3,556 | <issue_start>username_0: Although the presence of a senate suggests that universities nominally are governed somewhat by their faculty, it is frequently stated that there has been a trend towards greater managerialism, which has perhaps undermined the powers of faculty regarding university governance.
What current powers does a faculty senate typically have, or is it mostly a rubber-stamp for the administrators?<issue_comment>username_1: This question seems a bit wide to answer. Are you interested in public or private schools? Junior college or peer 1 research level? US or elsewhere? Let me answer from the prospective of a 4-year US state institution. Generally senates seem to be what the faculty make of them, they can choose to become a rubber stamp, or choose to act...
**A. The senate functions as a voice of the faculty**
By filtering and focusing the concerns of the faculty, the senate functions as a key voice of the faculty. A voice selected or elected by departments across the campus. The senate can conduct dialog with the administration, offer press releases, lobby with legislators, join in with other institutions to tackle larger issues... Whether or not they are listened to, faculty member should speak together often about the central issues at the institution.
**B. Determination of General Educational Policy**
Traditionally the senate allows the different disciplines to discuss joint concerns, such as the general education policy, starting new programs, ... They are rarely the final voice (or even the key voice) in these issues, but they are an important one. Anytime an educational goal has been set, it is the faculty who should determine the curriculum, these decisions usually pass through a senate body.
**C. Maintaining the Faculty "handbook"**
This may be given different names at different institutions, but the subset of policies and procedures related to tenure, promotion, post tenure review, usually fall under faculty review. Core parts are usually decided by the institutions board, but many of the details of faculty evaluations, ... are often decided by the faculty. Even when they are not, the Senate provides a united voice to address these issues.
**D. Protect the Faculty's Interests**
For example, the Senate should (to the best of their ability) be involved in suggestion priorities for budgeting (whether listened to or not); in suggesting standards for academic freedom (and explaining to its member what it is, and what it is not); when necessary, the Senate should be ready to stand up for individual faculty when the institutions polices have been incorrectly applied; ...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I've been on the Senate and on the Faculty Board of Studies in my university. Basically, boards like these are about communication, to make sure there is some oversight by academics of administrative decisions. They do have veto rights, and on rare occasion these may be exercised. Individuals on them have an opportunity to bring things to the attention of academic executives. How happy they seem about an idea also gives the executive an idea of how much trouble an idea will be to implement. They also learn things about what is happening in the university or faculty which they can bring back to their department.
How useful a board is and how much communication is really done depends on both established culture and individual initiative. But the mechanisms are usually there in the university's charter for these groups to actually to be quite useful.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/06 | 564 | 2,450 | <issue_start>username_0: I did a modest undergraduate in Information Systems (3/4) and good master's in CS (3.4/4). I've PhD acceptance from a good school in Canada. However, I still need to go to top school , or at least a well-known school, in US.
I am planning to apply to top schools in CS next year (since deadlines already passed). I have done some research and got some papers accepted at good conferences. Beside getting good scores in GRE, what should I do to be well-prepared for the next year?
I am fully sponsored student by my government, how will this affect the admit decision?<issue_comment>username_1: Your approach is wrong and will be a hindrance in maximizing your chances for acceptance. No school wants to accept someone who only wants to go to their school because of its ranking. You need to tailor your application to demonstrate why you want to go to the particular school. Once you have identified some schools/supervisors, ideally one of your recommendation writers can introduce you. You then need to build on that relationship. Talk to them about how your work fits in with their past and current work. As your relationship with the potential supervisors builds, figure out how they fit into the department. They will likely have the inside knowledge needed for writing a really good application.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's take inventory. To respond to your order of presentation, your grades are so-so, not bad enough to keep you "out," but by themselves, not good enough to be a strong recommendation.
The next thing is: "I've done some research and got some papers accepted at good conferences." That puts you "ahead of the class" and probably got you into the good Canadian university. That will probably get you into many a good American university. As an American, I'd like to see you come stateside.
Perhaps the most interesting thing you said was that you are a fully sponsored (paid) student by your government. That suggests "scholarship student" to me, perhaps the equivalent of America's "National Merit Scholar."
In your applications, to universities, talk about how their programs meet the needs of your government, and why you'd be an ideal research bridge between the two. Many American universities are looking to add geographical and cultural diversity to their mix of students. The fact that your government chose you as an "ambassador" is a factor in your favor.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/06 | 1,002 | 4,654 | <issue_start>username_0: A student asked me to write a letter of recommendation for graduate school admission in London and the student insisted that I include a short biography describing my job title and qualifications. I find this information is a little out of place. First, my degree is in progress, so I do not have any impressive qualifications. Second, I think such letters are intended to introduce the applicant, not the writer.
* Is this common practice to include a biography of the writer in letters of recommendation?
* Where does this information typically appear in the document? In the opening paragraph? As a separate, attached document?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, this is relatively common. (In my opinion, not common enough.)
Recommendation letters carry more weight if he reader knows the writer's qualifications. In particular, letters about qualification for graduate school carry more weight if the reader has some sense of the writer's track record for judging students' research ability. (This is why letters from senior faculty are more valued — not because of their vast research experience, but because they've presumably seen and evaluated more students.) The best way for the reader to understand your track record is to *tell them*.
But briefly, because as you suggest, the letter isn't about you.
I don't think there's a standard way to do this. Some people put their bio early in the letter, say in the second paragraph (because the first paragraph is the actual recommendation). I put mine in a footnote on the last page.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I would regard a separate biography as a bit odd; it's normal to sign with your current title (so I sign "username_2, Assistant Professor of Mathematics") and of course, write on letterhead, so your current position is clear. In terms of context on how many students you've evaluated, you can slip that into various points in the letter. I would just stick a sentence into the second paragraph; one can unobtrusively give a short explanation of who you are mixed with the standard explanation of how you know the student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You are right, the point of the letter is **entirely** the candidate, any sentence(s) about yourself should be entirely to the point of facilitating communication about the candidate. I was told in school that all histories tell you as much about the culture that wrote them as the culture they describe, so you need to take both into account when you read them. I suppose this is true of reference letters as well. It's like introducing yourself before you ask an academic you don't know a question one-on-one over coffee at a conference – sometimes there's no need, but sometimes it's essential to framing the question & making the most of the other person's time & answer.
I have never been explicitly asked for a biography beyond "how do you know the candidate, for how long, and in what capacity". However, the UK is under a lot of legal pressure concerning letters of reference because some are so much better than others, not necessarily due to the candidate, but possibly due to how knowledgeable the writer is about writing letters. Possibly candidates deserve some credit for picking good letter writers, but this could be hard particularly for very junior candidates. So having guidance for writing a letter is useful, it's letting all letter writers know good practice by previous letter writers.
Personally I include biographical information (not a full biography) where I think it may be helpful and when I am trying to write a strong letter. Similarly, I also give information about our institution where I think it might not be known and be helpful. Examples: if I am writing a US institution from the UK, I let them know that I have attended US institutions & know what their programmes are like. Sometimes if I know someone well in the department I may point that out in the letter so that whoever is doing the search has the option of going to ask that person how seriously to take my opinion if they want to.
I put this at the end of the first paragraph or possibly as a stand-alone second paragraph, in advance of offering my verbose opinion of the candidate, so that the reader can have that information in mind when they see what my opinion is. The first sentence of the first paragraph says who the letter is for & for what position. The second sentence is my one-sentence summary of my recommendation. The third (or the second paragraph) is in what capacity I am writing the letter. That's where biographical details might be useful.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2012/04/07 | 3,012 | 12,338 | <issue_start>username_0: How do you cope when a department chair is all out to cause you problems? Especially when he is doing it for personal reasons that I have no control over (e.g. gender, skin color, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, accent, etc). My chair hates me, so he harasses me with bad teaching loads, too many preps, assigning me one class at 8am on one campus and another class at 8pm on a separate campus three hours away, making me teach every day when others teach only twice a week, denying me funding to go to conferences, not permitting me to go on a sabbatical, etc etc etc. He is highly unethical. I suspect he discards good teaching ratings I get and pencils in bad teaching ratings but I have no way to prove it. He makes up untrue anonymous complaints from anonymous students and anonymous complaints from anonymous faculty / staff. When a particular person is not hired and everyone wanted to hire that person, he whispers to everyone that I am the one who voted against hiring. He tries to turn everyone against me. When anything even remotely goes wrong, he blames me.
He has the Dean in his pocket. He is also the chair of the faculty senate, childhood friends with the university president, brother-in-law of the provost. He is not the research type - he has one of those Ed.D. degrees and is a career administrator who has been the department chair for 17 years now. When I was hired, he was on medical leave, so he had no say in my hiring decision. He is also the only person in the department who does not teach or do research related to the department. He is a politician - former mayor of a small city - so much more astute and politically shrewd than I can ever be. He is dishonest, a blatant cheat and a frequent liar, so sitting down with him definitely never helped. He has superb contacts within the town and in state politics. Short of finding a new job, is there anything I can do? I cannot leave this university for personal reasons relating to the two-body problem, family whose help I need to take care of a severely handicapped child and other personal reasons.<issue_comment>username_1: I agree with JeffE that leaving is the best solution, but it may not be an option. One key question is whether you have tenure: if not, you're presumably doomed (if the chair's behavior is as bad as you fear) and you will need to find another job anyway.
Assuming you have reasonable job security, I'd sit down with the chair and ask what he envisions. Don't complain, argue, or try to present your side. Instead, you could start by acknowledging that the two of you have unfortunately gotten off to a rough start in your working relationship, and that because of his stature and leadership role it's important for you to earn his respect, so you'd like his advice on how to improve the situation. Your goal is to learn, not to debate. Don't explicitly agree to any facts that aren't true, but you don't have to fact check everything he says, and you shouldn't dispute his perspective or opinions in this conversation.
One possibility is that he is an insecure jerk who wants you to submit to his power and authority. If you do so, and let him boss you around a little without complaining, then he may treat you somewhat better. [This is assuming he can't treat you any worse than he already is. If you fear things could get worse, then be careful, but your question suggests you don't have a lot to lose.]
Another possibility is that he just doesn't want you around, and there's simply nothing you can do to get on his good side. In that case, maybe he could help you transfer to another related department, for example. Of course, you can't even bring this up unless you have some job security, since otherwise you have no leverage at all. And it's important to do it in a face-saving way. There's no way it will happen if it looks like he is getting rid of a problem employee (the administration and the other department will not accept that as a valid reason for such a transfer), and obviously he won't cooperate if the stated reason is getting you out from the control of an irresponsible chair. Instead, you'd have to give it a positive spin: helping your career by giving you a chance to develop in a slightly different research direction, building ties between departments and fostering interdisciplinary connections, etc. It may be galling, but you need to set this up in a way that makes it look like your chair is doing something valuable for the university by helping to arrange it. If you can get your chair enthusiastic about this, and if there's another plausible department, then the chair's influence within the university might really help you. And don't be too restrictive in ruling out possible departments: there might not be any appropriate match, but I know of a couple of cases in which people have successfully resolved personality conflicts by moving to departments that were a bit further afield than one might expect (engineering vs. science, for example). If you've got tenure, then the university has a powerful incentive to fix this conflict, even if it means letting you sit in an odd department.
Leaving the university is radically different from switching departments, and you should not ask the chair for help in doing that. Within the university, your chair's standing with the administration will play a major role in what opportunities are available. Outside the university, your chair probably can't help you very much, but could certainly hurt you, so it's not worth the risk.
The worst case scenario is that your chair hates you and wants to hurt your career, regardless of which department you are in. In that case, there's nothing you can do if your chair has the full support of the administration, and you'll have to either leave the university or wait for the chair to retire. However, you shouldn't give up all hope until you've exhausted options like submitting or transferring.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are dealing with a bully who is insecure and threatened by you, direct negotiation will only result in your being manipulated further. Read the available on-line literature on adult bullying.
Making friends with other powerful people (e.g. superordinates of your boss) is effective, eventually you might become someone that the bully wants "on side" and their overt behaviour will just flip like a light switch. If you can document all your claims e.g. some members of a department having twice the teaching load for no clear, publicly-stated policy reason, you may have legal recourse & be able to get a more level playing field to try to prove your academic merit on (have you talked to HR?) But if things are as "sewn up" as you say, and there is no help from HR or another campus organisation, then the best thing is to change job.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Just to add to the other excellent comments: while I have no personal experience that might be of value in your situation, I think that there is one thing you MUST do on a continuing basis regardless of everything else.
**Document every instance where you feel this person is abusing their authority in relation to you**. Accumulate as much evidence you can on each case, and build up a case file. Even if you don't go on the offensive, you'll need this if the chair starts trying direct confrontation and provocation (instead of the passive aggressive bullying that's going on right now)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Not a full answer, but a suggestion: Consider meeting with the college's ombudsperson (if they have one), affirmative action officer, EEOC officer, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: If the harassment really is for reasons of "e.g. gender, skin color, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, accent, etc," then the federal government could get involved. See the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission website (http://www.eeoc.gov/) for more information.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: This is a very interesting question, and I am surprised that there's no more about "bullying" in the SO academia community (I hope this will change fast).
As anonymous and new user, I can share some experience:
1) If someone (higher in grade) bullies or harasses you, it's sad to say, but that means that you are not seen as doing a valuable contribution to the department. Not a "maybe", not a "perhaps": that is just what it is. This assumption could be right or wrong, but any dean/chair/professor wants to have a supportive (adoring?) team. So either you adapt to the system, or you will make your life very miserable: make your contributions very clear, boast about your workload or find another place. Bullies like strong (and loud) voices.
2) Do not confront the bullying person: it's anyway an unfair battle, since they're managers and higher-ranked anyway.
3) Be blatantly open with what you do, aka "blow your own trumpet": when you start doing it, others reply as well, and you start realising that your "case" is no worse or better than somebody else's.
**MISTAKES TO BE AVOIDED:**
I think that the worst mistake to be done in these cases is moaning about the issue, or using "allies" to make the case, or asking the unions to do something about it. Moaning won't solve your case, but just make your stomach more acid; internal allies will not either: having allies and support is generally a good thing, but I realised that I was just "using" them to reinforce my assumptions and beliefs (ending up in a infinite loop of self-commiseration); unions will just use a pre-defined strategy that will be well known in advance by the bully.
**REMEDIES:**
Since you do not want to change your affiliation (but sadly this is the only real way to solve the issue, I am afraid), my take on the issue is to be honest with yourself, and ask whether your workload could be worse, or if you could make a request to avoid some teaching times by using some reasonable excuses, and in general stopping being negative about the person. The latter is tough but again, if you're being (overtly or secretly) negative, the bully will make your life even worse.
**RESOURCES:**
An excellent blog on the matter, and an "external" voice to talk to (yes! they talk and listen to you, also privately...) but in the UK: <http://bulliedacademics.blogspot.co.uk/>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: You didn't mention if you had a union or not. If you do, go to the union's grievance officer. Bring all the evidence. Have a conference with the chair and the union rep. It doesn't have to be hostile. The focus can be how you can be on par with other faculty members. Most grievance reps are good at building consensus. It will put the chair on notice that his decision making isn't to be arbitrary and capricious.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: I got through this type of situation through a combination of institutional and personal means.
I was subject to mobbing by a group of faculty members in a particular field of British lit (pre-1800). When one of them became chair, and I stepped down as graduate program director, they piled on. One filed a specious grievance against me. When that failed after a year of harassment (during which I lost my mother), the new chair scheduled me to teach 3-4 new preps every single term. After four years of this, and after 3 separate administrative complaints that went through my chair and were stopped by the dean, I filed a grievance after my chair finally got grounds to file a negative performance review because she had overloaded me for years. The grievance was part of a peer review process; my peers found for me five to one. Next, I was diagnosed with breast cancer and got 1 year off. During that period, my chair got promoted (!!!) and was gone. Problem solved, on top of which I had grounds to file EEOC complaints for gender, age, and disability discrimination. I'm back this term. So far so good, with a chair that doesn't seem to have the stomach for all of this.
We are so vulnerable--and until our good work is trashed, we don't realize how vulnerable we are.
Fight the good fight when you can, and back off and lay low when you can. There's nothing to be lost by it, either in terms of your job or in terms of your self respect.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/08 | 1,233 | 5,252 | <issue_start>username_0: I've always wondered if PIs look for a perfect fit for their projects. For instance, a post doc vacancy is advertised as follows:
* Must have completed PhD with 3 peer reviewed journal articles.
* Must have x,y and z skills.
* Must have had some exposure to a,b and c skills.
Now what if the applicant has only 1 journal article and is working on a 2nd manuscript. Has x and z skills and has had exposure to a and b skills but not c but some other skills that might be useful?
So would this applicant want to apply for said post doc?
If so does how does the hiring dynamic work?
Would this dynamic be the same whether it is an engineering/science post doc or otherwise?
Would the applicant be overlooked because he/she isn't a 100% fit?
I realize that each situation would need to be judged differently but there has got to be a general thumb rule.<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, I hire two types of postdocs.
The first one is the "zero expectation" postdoc, this is the postdoc that I hire when I already have the manpower to complete the project, and when the project is clearly on the good tracks. For this one, I just look at the research work he has done (I don't care about numbers/publications, only about the quality of the work) and make sure that he will be able to work alone (mmm, this means that I look for someone that should already be a faculty member somewhere, but which is not for various reasons).
But what is interesting you I guess is the second type. In any project the most important thing is to make sure that we will be able to complete it in time. If I hire a postdoc for that purpose and if the postdoc don't do the job, I will have to do it myself, I don't want this to happen. So, the only thing that interests me is the ability to complete the goals of the project. Publications? except if the goal of the project is to produce papers I don't care. Skills? this is what I am looking for, and more precisly I am looking for confirmed skills, not exposure (too risky).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As Sylvain implies, the freedom in selecting a postdoc depends strongly on the nature of the project. If I have a position for which on-going funding is available (because it's part of a long-term center, for instance), the "must haves" or more like "would like to haves."
On the other hand, if I have a limited-term position (one funded through something like an NIH, NSF, or DFG grant which has a time-limit attached), then I need to be much more strict in selecting my candidates. Then I want one with as close a match as possible.
That said, however, if the clock is already running, then I can't necessarily wait for a postdoc who has *all* of the qualifications to come along. In that case, I will pick someone who satisfies most of the criteria, and do extra due diligence to make sure that the postdoc is *teachable*: that is, that she is willing to learn the extra skills that she needs to complete the project in a timely manner.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Postdocs have an absolutely critical and unique role in a research group. They have more research potential than anyone else in academia, because they are both full time on research and yet experienced, not students. They are also very expensive and a rare luxury that comes only with heavy investment from a funder or university.
The first thing I look for therefore is demonstrated proof that the candidate will take good advantage of the expensive opportunity they are being offered. Forms of evidence:
* existing publications
* publications in prep.
* letters of reference
These should show that the candidate has skills in what needs to be done, and the determination and internal motivation to be a successful academic.
The next thing I look for is evidence that the candidate is very likely to employ those skills in the area that I am funded for them to research. This is done through open and frank conversations with the candidate about their research and career goals, what *I* need, what *they* need, where they intend to go next, etc. A postdoc is at a critical time in their career, and everyone should know that they need to produce papers out of their PhD and that they may leave early if the right lifetime opportunity comes along. I try to negotiate in advance about what research I absolutely need them to complete, what further I'd like them to complete, and to discuss writing and research schedules such that they can meet both of our needs and wants, preferably through some synergy (e.g. of the possible outcomes of this project, which would best suit both of our goals?) I then try to agree a schedule about what research will be done when, what is the earliest date they'll start looking for their next position, when will they or we start writing the next grant or fellowship bid etc.
These negotiations give me not only a sense of how much I can expect us to accomplish if I make this hire, but also how well we can work together and how similarly we understand our responsibilities as academics.
Finally of course there is a luck element: if there is more than one viable candidate, the one who seems likely to be the best fit wins.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/04/09 | 273 | 1,047 | <issue_start>username_0: I wonder if there are universities having real-world MSc related courses. My focus is to understand cloud technologies and services(especially if it is Amazon). Preferably in UK, but can be actually anywhere around the world. Maybe general or specific like PAAS , SAAS etc. Could you suggest any?<issue_comment>username_1: There's an MSc specialising in Networks and Distributed Systems at [St Andrews](http://www.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/?q=node/47). There's also quite a large group that does cloud computing research and a [cloud lab](http://www.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/stacc), so you would almost certainly be able to do an MSc project on that topic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: At the [K.U. Leuven](http://wms.cs.kuleuven.be/cs/) there is a lot of research done in distributed systems, with a recent focus on cloud computing. You could do a Masters in Distributed Systems and do your thesis on an issue related to cloud computing. (One would need to first check that the course could be done in English.)
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/09 | 534 | 2,143 | <issue_start>username_0: Suppose you do bad in undergraduate school in say computer science. But you do very well in a masters program in computer science. If you want to apply to a PhD program in computer science, will the masters degree grades offset the undergraduate degree grades?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, recent performance will tend to outweigh prior performance. I will look at a student with a graduate 4.0 and an undergraduate 3.2 much more favorably than the converse (unless there are obvious extenuating circumstances, such as a large jump in the quality of the graduate program compared to the undergraduate).
The source of the GPA drop is also important. A bad freshman year is almost certainly ignorable. A bad senior year is a red flag. Similarly, I will give much less weight to grades in "general education" classes, as I'm not hiring them based on their ability to analyze Shakespeare or Milton. Important classes for the major, though, can be deadly even if they are in the undergraduate years.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Sort of.
I was in exactly the situation you describe 20+ years ago. My undergrad GPA was horrible (even restricted to computer science classes); my MS GPA was near-perfect; I got into Berkeley as a PhD student. But I don't think the improvement in my *grades* was as important as the improvement in my *letters*. My undergrad letters said "He's smart but lazy", which is the kiss of death. My MS letters were much more positive. Also, when I applied to Berkeley, I had some research results in submission, so my positive letters had some substance to draw on.
Also, I got very, *very*, **very** lucky.
Now, as a faculty member who reviews PhD applications, I would certainly look at the improvement in grades as a good sign. But as I've mentioned elsewhere, above a certain threshold of "good enough", [grades don't matter](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/958/priority-of-application-materials-for-admission-decision/961#961). Especially since you're applying with a master's degree, your demonstrated research ability is **much** more important.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/04/09 | 1,399 | 5,590 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently looking for a PhD position and have started to realize that a lot of my time goes into sporadeously surfing the web in hope of finding an open position. Are there good job directories for academic work that lists available positions?<issue_comment>username_1: <http://www.higheredjobs.com>
They have jobs broken down by Job Category, Region, and Institution Type. They also do a great job of keeping you informed of opportunities when they are added to the their database. You provide your CV and potential employers can search for applicants by credentials.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's almost impossible to give a general answer to this question, since different fields handle things in very different ways. Your profile says you're a cognitive scientist and philosopher, which is beyond my competence, but for other readers here's an answer for mathematics jobs in the US:
The largest number of job ads for US academic jobs in math, especially at but not limited to reseach-oriented schools, are found at <http://www.ams.org/profession/employment-services/eims/eims-home>. In particular, most math departments do not advertise on generic websites (not field specific) unless there are university requirements to do so, and you cannot find most math jobs without going to math-specific sites. I have no idea whether this is typical for academic fields, or unique to mathematics.
One unusual feature of mathematics (compared with computer science, for example) is that there's a centralized application site, <http://www.mathjobs.org/jobs>, which covers a surprisingly large fraction of jobs and makes handling letters of recommendation very easy. It's still important to look at ads on math society websites, since some schools do not allow departments to use mathjobs.
For industrial or government employment, it's a real mess, and different subfields advertise in rather different places (or sometimes hardly advertise at all). I don't think there's anything valuable to say there without narrowing things down quite a bit.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It would depend on what your field of work is. But heres a nifty little list that I keep an eye on (I am looking for a postdoctoral position in academia / research and these websites are quite helpful to *me*)
* [www.phds.org](http://www.phds.org)
* [www.postdocjobs.com](http://www.postdocjobs.com)
* <http://www.cfd-online.com/Jobs/>
* <http://www.aps.org/careers/>
* <http://www.academickeys.com>
There are a few websites suggested in the answers below/above my response to this question and they are quite nice too!
Besides that you probably have a general idea as to what you'd want to work as / work for. You could perhaps target a bunch of universities and faculty members for prospective positions?
Good luck!
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: <http://www.myscience.cc/jobs>
Take a look for a good research job adverts aggregator. Also adverts in top-notch magazines like Nature, or similar in the field of your interest are relevant. Your nearest library is your friend.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: You should consider location-specific job directories:
* Some countries maintain such directions: in this UK, for example, there is [jobs.ac.uk](http://www.jobs.ac.uk)
* Most universities have a job directory, so if you have decided on your dream geographic area, you can look at the corresponding listings.
Also, some journals have a job listings section (just like your local newspaper):
* [*Science*](http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org)
* [*Nature*](http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In case you are interested in working in Germany:
[www.academics.com](http://www.academics.com)
(I guess relevant ads will be in English)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: The European Commission supports the web-portal **EURAXESS - Researchers in Motio** which has also a [job portal](http://ec.europa.eu/euraxess/index.cfm/jobs/index). EURAXESS is especially helpful as it lists jobs from **all European Union member countries** in **all disciplines** (incl. sciences, humanities & social sciences). You can filter for countries, research fields, positions (PhD, postdoc, professor, ...) and your own keywords.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Many jobs are advertised by **scientific associations** or institutionalized networks of researchers. At least this is true for political science, but I figure it applies to other disciplines as well. You can easily find relevant associations by googling for `$discipline association`. For example, the American Political Science Associations (APSA) has a nice [job directory on their website](http://www.apsanet.org/jobs_search.asp).
Moreover, scientific associations and other networks frequently circulate vacancies through their **mailing-lists**. Non-association mailing lists are another great source for academic job-hunting. For example in Germany, jobs in the discipline of international relations are advertised through the [IB Liste](https://de.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/ib-liste/info), jobs in history and cultural studies through [HSozKult](http://www.hsozkult.de/). Again, use your favorite search engine to find relevant mailing lists for your discipline.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: I create a platform for Academic people. You may search academic jobs updated daily at [Academic Gates platform](https://academicgates.com/job). There are thousands jobs collected daily. Hope it help!
Upvotes: -1 |
2012/04/09 | 610 | 2,649 | <issue_start>username_0: Invited talks are important for moving up the academic ladder, so I'd like to know how one maximizes the odds of being offered to be an invited speaker at conferences.
I am aware of the most obvious things like having important results to report. However, apparently this is not always necessary: one often sees in the list of invited speakers some fresh PhDs neighboring the really big shots. So, are there any *non-obvious* strategies to increase the odds of becoming an invited speaker at a conference?
I realize that the advice may be field-specific, and I am most interested in the tips for conferences in mathematics and physics.<issue_comment>username_1: Give some colloquia (departmental seminars or lab-specific talks) in the departments of organizers of conferences. You can sometimes invite yourself by writing to the organizer of their seminar series and offering yourself as a speaker but better might be having your phd advisor write and recommend you.
This will increase your name recognition with the critical people and can give you a reputation for giving good talks. Organizers are unlikely to take a chance on someone that is junior and none of them have heard speak. If you can give a talk somewhere that will be videoed and posted online, that would also help with this issue.
Finally, if you work with a more famous friend (or phd advisor) in the same area who is frequently invited to give talks, you could mention to them that you are trying to do this and they may recommend you for talks they have to decline.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Find out which conference organizers your PhD advisor knows and see if he'll recommend you to them.
Present an amazing poster at a conference and spend some time getting the word about prior to the conference about your work, so that when the organizers come by the poster session, they see your poster mobbed with people.
One thing you shouldn't do is respond to any of those conference solicitations for conferences you've never heard of, usually located in some Middle Eastern or Asian country. It's spam and they usually just bought a list of email addresses and did keyword targeting.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: * Do great research.
* Give great presentations of your research.
* Become known, not only for your research, but by actively participating in conferences, workshops and other meetings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Volunteer to help organise meetings yourself & invite people. Even if this doesn't directly help you get attention (which it might), at least you'll understand the process better.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/10 | 412 | 1,916 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently I've changed jobs, and consequently the field of research has also changed. But I'm still getting proposals for publications in the previous field, and it is interesting for me to accept some of them. My concern is about which affiliation to use: on one hand I gain all the knowledge in that field while working on the previous employer, also I hope they can cover my expenses related to the publication. On the other hand, I do not work for them anymore, and my current company has very little interest in my old field of research, and probably will not support it financially, but I think it is wise to mention them as well. As a compromise I'm thinking to put the previous employer in the affiliation, and the name of my new employer in the footnote, something like "currently at XYZ". Surely I'll discuss this issue with both, although the opinion of the community is also very valuable.<issue_comment>username_1: If you have written the publication **only** with the resources and support of the former employer, then it is perfectly acceptable to do what you have written, and list the old address as your address for the "active" affiliations, and include a "present address" affiliation to show your updated physical location.
However, if your new employer *does* provide financial support, then you should list them accordingly. This is especially important if any of the actual research that makes its way into a publication has been performed while working for the new employer *using their resources*.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would list the current affiliation in the address field (that field just tells where people can find you, not much more than that) and start the paper with an elaborate paragraph starting with "This work was made possible through the generous support by.... ". This way you kill both birds at once.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/10 | 1,396 | 6,237 | <issue_start>username_0: My background: I'm currently 1 year out of my undergrad in psychology and I currently have a job working on a educational grant project at a university. I've lost some interest in the field of psychology as a whole and I'm considering going back to school for computer science. When I expressed this interest to an adviser at my old school she mentioned that I might be interested in a post bachelor comp sci certificate. The certificate is 30 credits and can probably be done in about half the time that another bachelors could be completed in. I asked her if any of the graduates of the certificate program had had any trouble getting into graduate school with said degree and she said no. However, I believe there is probably more to this than she let on considering that it is her job to promote this program.
Question: I'm wondering if anyone has any experience with these type of certificates? I know that I will have a more complete computer science education with an undergrad but I'm wondering if it is completely necessary. All said and done I would like to get a masters in computer science because it seems like the smart career move. Will I be limiting my job potential by only having a certificate and a bachelors in an unrelated field? Is graduate school really possible with just a certificate? My dream job would be working for a company in research and development for human to computer interfaces. I also have a fleeting passion for gaming and music production, but I consider these to be more hobbies than serious career interests.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends largely on how "strict" the employer in question is regarding qualifications. Some companies—particularly larger corporations—don't have the ability to recognize that the certificate might be equivalent to a bachelor's degree. Then, you really need to be able to demonstrate that you have the requisite credentials, and it's hard to "mix and match."
However, smaller employers are generally able to make those distinctions. However, the issue with these faster-paced programs is that you might not have the same breadth of experience as someone who has the bachelor's degree; the four-year degree holder may have internships and other work experience that will make them a more suitable candidate.
In general, though, you are right to be skeptical of what sounds like a "sales pitch," and do your own homework to make sure that it's recognized. One way to do this would be to contact some companies in the area and see if they've had any experience hiring graduates of this program. (You could also ask the sponsor of this program to identify some contacts for you—with the obvious caveat that you'll be getting the "success stories.")
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two issues: whether it will be a formal barrier (i.e., you'll be screened out before anyone ever looks at your application carefully) and whether it will impress people.
For graduate school applications, there's no way you'll be officially screened out for this reason. There are several programs aimed at encouraging post-baccalaureate certificates to help women enter computer science. They attract excellent students, so grad schools are happy to see these applications; furthermore, if any grad school ever turned down applicants with such a background just because they had no "real" degree in CS, they'd be in big trouble on gender equity grounds. So you have nothing to worry about there: grad schools are aware of these certificates and willing to consider applicants with them.
Of course, there are still issues of people's personal reactions, for example how rigorous or extensive they think the program is. It presumably depends on the program, and also perhaps on which courses you take within the program. If take you challenging courses and do well in them, ideally do some sort of project with a faculty supervisor, and get strong letters of recommendation, then you should be in good shape for grad school applications. As a sanity check, you should ask about the placement record of previous students in the program: without some reason to think otherwise, you can expect you would end up somewhere in that range. If they all do well, that's a very good sign; if some but not all do, then you need to make sure you end up in that top group.
As for industry, CS hiring is much less credential-driven than some branches of engineering (where there are more regulatory or liability issues). If you can demonstrate talent and skill, then nobody will really care what your degree is in (except sometimes for research jobs that require a Ph.D.). There are some tricky issues: for example, some of the top tech companies get enormous numbers of applications and have to filter them rather brutally. However, even there the filtering is more often by prestige (did you get impressive grades at a top university) rather than the field the degree is in.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I am a retired software engineer from a well known company in U.S. Your dream job is to work for a company in R&D for HCI. My advice might be useful for you.
In the old days, the HR department of those companies received hundreds of paper resumes everyday (I carried bags of job application letters for an HR staff before. Don't ask me why I did that, just guess.) Now, they receive hundreds if not thousands of e-mails per day.
The way they filter the job applications is by looking for key words. When they have an HCI job vacancy, they look for computer programming experience, psychology and others. So, your major is important for your future job hunting.
Now, your question, do you need a degree or a certificate is good enough? In my opinion, a degree is always preferable unless you cannot afford to it.
Many companies do not recognize those certificates. They would wonder why you didn't get a degree. Is it because you were not good enough? or some other reasons. You would be filtered out. Remember, they receive hundreds of e-mails everyday. By the time they read all of them, it's 5pm. When they see you have a CS degree, a psychology degree and some working experience, they'll call you for an interview.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/10 | 1,959 | 7,336 | <issue_start>username_0: I want to keep a research notebook for my computational "experiments". Basically, I should at least be able to write text and attach images like plots. Other nice features to have would be
1. linking to past experiments/pages
2. latex equations
3. uploading papers, or other urls
4. being able to transfer data
5. dating and version control
6. open-source tool
I am already familiar with trello and tiddlywiki. Trello is good for attaching stuff and organising tasks, but I need a notebook where I attach a plot, write stuff around it, attach another below it. It doesn't have a paper or canvas. Tiddlywiki is a little painful for attaching pics and equations, the file bloats, it seems I am keeping a blog.
What is a good, free electronic notebook tool for research/lab work?<issue_comment>username_1: For uploading papers and annotating them, I use [mendeley](http://www.mendeley.com).
To organize my citations, I use [citeulike](http://www.citeulike.org) which is nifty for it bibtex entry generation. I also use [Jabref](http://jabref.sourceforge.net/) locally on my computer to manage my papers.
I am into numerical simulations as well and I generally add my results to latex documents (figures and all) as I eventually need it in a latex format for my dissertation! Plus this way, I save time!
Have you tried [google notebook](http://www.google.com/notebook)? I haven't used it in at least 3 years so I don't quite know how good it is now.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you're looking for something like <http://figshare.com>
It's part of Digital Science, which is part of the same family of companies as Nature Publishing, but I know the guy who runs it and I think he's really sharp & going about things the right way.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: For the last month, I have been using [Gitit](http://gitit.net/) for this purpose. That link goes to a live demo where you can try it out. It satisfies all your requirements:
1. It's a wiki, so you can easily make links between pages.
2. It's built on pandoc, which understands TeX and uses MathJax to render it (it technically renders a subset of TeX, but it's a pretty substantial subset)
3. It's actually a Git repository, so you can upload anything you want to it. Or just put your figures out on the web (via figshare or a public Dropbox link) and link to them.
4. Same as 3.
5. Again, it's Git.
6. It is open source: <https://github.com/jgm/gitit>
As a bonus, you can put it out publicly on the web if you want (or just run it locally on your machine). I run it on an internal server at my University and my students and post-docs use it to. Thus it's a convenient way to share information as well.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Check out GitHub hosted blogs using what's called "jekyll":
-http://jekyllrb.com/
-https://github.com/mojombo/jekyll (see the wiki tab for example sites)
-Easy way to start: use jekyll bootstrap or octopress
Jekyll is just a bunch of code that makes it easy to have stuff that you have on blogs/lab notebooks: tags, pagination, etc.
Some cool things are that its free, open source, versioned, handles images/papers/etc, can integrate comments (I use Disqus).
It does require a bit of a learning curve over other blog platforms, but its well worth it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Org-mode
========
I use [Org-mode](http://orgmode.org/) to organize and track my research. It is an Emacs major
mode that seems to hit most of your requirements. The .org files are
plain text which should guard against bloat and lets you access them anywhere, even when you do not
have Emacs or Org-mode available.
>
> linking to past experiments/pages
>
>
>
Org-mode has linking capability to any type of file, as well as to
specific locations in a document.
>
> latex equations
>
>
>
Org-mode has support not only for LaTeX equations but for a number of
programming languages via [org-babel](http://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/index.html). You can include the code blocks
inside your .org file.
>
> uploading papers, or other URLs.
>
>
>
Because it is only a text file, this sort of behavior can be
accomplished through the linking mechanism. The links
can be to other documents/papers on your machine or URLs. Visiting a
URL in Org-mode will open your browser to the requested link.
>
> being able to transfer data.
>
>
>
I am unsure what you are looking for here. Org-mode has a nice
built-in table editor with automatic column width adjustment and some
spreadsheet behavior. If you do not want the actual data in the .org
file, you can always link to do the data. If you are looking to import
data into the file directly, Org-mode has a function `org-table-import` that
will parse TAB or whitespace separated data into an Org table.
>
> dating and version control
>
>
>
I use Org-mode to track my time spent on various research items. You
can set the headings in Org-mode to behave like multi-state TODO lists
and assign time to them. Most headings start as TODO, switch to
STARTED when I clock in on them, and then I can update them to DONE
when I am finished. It can also generate reports based on your tracked time. For example, I use a built-in report for the last week to help generate weekly research updates.
I handle my version control and distribution
through Dropbox, but since the files are plain text any version
control system you are comfortable with should work fine.
>
> open-source tool
>
>
>
Org-mode is open source.
Org-mode also can be set to display inline images, so even though the
actual .org file stays in plain text for VCS, when you open the file
in Org-mode you can view the images, and comment on them accordingly.
While the .org files themselves are plain text, Org-mode has a number
of export options, including LaTeX, PDF, HTML, DocBook, OpenDocument
and others. So if you want to turn your research notebook into
something more visually appealing than a plain text file, there are
many options. I would recommend [this paper](http://www.jstatsoft.org/v46/i03/paper) for a good description of what Org-mode can do in a research environment.
The downside is that it is a mode for Emacs. If you are not already
using Emacs it has a steep learning curve and can require extensive
customization to get things running exactly the way you want.
Org-mode and AUCTeX (the Emacs LaTeX mode) are the reasons I spent the
time to learn to work with Emacs and I have not been disappointed.
However, if you are looking to get something up and running quickly
(and are not already familiar with Emacs) it may not be your best
option.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I personally use [VoodooPad](http://flyingmeat.com/voodoopad/), which is basically a personal wiki, in conjunction with [LaTeXiT](http://pierre.chachatelier.fr/latexit/latexit-home.php) for latex equations. I've found it to work very well; you can store many things in it, including papers. It's all text-based so you can back up using Git or whatever you like. They have a free version. Not open source.
I'm surprised nobody's mentioned [Evernote](http://www.evernote.com/). They claim you can put anything at all in it, and from what I've seen, that's true. Backup to Evernote cloud. Free, not open source.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/12 | 3,167 | 12,519 | <issue_start>username_0: I would like to have suggestions of good software for drawing illustrations in research papers. I already know about [Xfig](http://www.xfig.org/), but this works only on Linux and is at times, clunky when it comes to text. Moreover the resolution is not always perfect making it difficult to manoeuvre the objects. Besides it is tough to learn and master, with all its weird click procedures.
I would love to know about better alternatives. Not talking about graphs here, just block diagrams and explanatory illustrations.<issue_comment>username_1: As drawing software, I use [OmniGraffle](http://www.omnigroup.com/products/omnigraffle/) which is much more modern that Xfig, but based on similar principles. It's only available for the Mac and is not free, as far as I know. With little effort, one can produce very attractive diagrams.
I also use [Tikz/PGF](http://www.texample.net/tikz/examples/). It produces very nice diagrams and is very flexible. On the other hand, it requires that you specify the diagram in LaTeX and it has a bit of a steep learning curve.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A free, fairly portable, and very complete tool for general illustration is [Inkscape](http://inkscape.org/). It uses `SVG` as its native file format, and aside from attempting to be a decent drawing tool in its own right, one of its design goals was to provide complete coverage of the features available in `SVG`.
For block diagrams, flow charts, and other simple sketches of process and data flow there is [Dia](http://live.gnome.org/Dia). It's primary design goal is to duplicate the features of Visio in free software. Like Visio, it uses a stencils and connections drawing model that works really well for diagramming relationships and flow, but gets tedious when attempting to do art.
For clean layout of directed or undirected graph diagrams, it is difficult to beat the [Graphviz](http://www.graphviz.org/) tools. They are primarily designed to be used from a textual description ([a concise intro here](http://www.graphviz.org/pdf/dotguide.pdf) (PDF)) of the graph, but there are various GUI tools that can edit their `.dot` files.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I use [Ipe](https://ipe.otfried.org) almost exclusively. It's not well polished, and some things are non-intuitive, but it does those things I need well (simple sketches of math. structures with LaTeX formatted text). Also, [LaTeX wiki book](http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX/Tips_and_Tricks#Graphics_and_Graph_editors) has some useful suggestions for alternatives.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: In general, if you intend to draw either [mind maps](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_map) or [flow diagrams](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_flow_diagram), you may use the [conceptdraw](http://www.conceptdraw.com/) tool. It serves both Mac and MS Windows users.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: If you really care about typography, it is best to produce the figures and the text with the same layout engine. This is the only way in which you can be sure that fonts, stroke size and spacing match those of your text.
TikZ, already suggested in username_1's answer, solves this problem excellently for TeX. Although, like TeX, it can be difficult for a newcomer. Adobe InDesign is a WYSIWYG solution. MS Publisher is another one, although less powerful. Word has limited capabilities in this respect.
Most often, this requires access to the final article style of the journal, and is work for a typographer rather than a scientist. So it would be better left to the journal staff. However, it is an unfortunate truth that most journals try to reduce costs at the expense of quality when it comes to typography. Some of them offer "professional figure editing" as an extra paid service for authors. Some of them just take what is provided and do not care about fonts and stroke sizes.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Mathematica is actually good for making all sorts of graphics.
Think of it as vector graphics software, but that every control point/coordinate can be specified to the decimal.
Edit:
The syntax is really clear, it is easy to procedurally construct graphics,
and it has lines, arrows, bezier curves, and of course a bunch of nice builtin plot functions that one can add extra decorations to.
Furthermore, it IS a programming language, so if you have multiple images, it is easy to share common components, so that a singe change affects all images (provided you use a good programming technique).
It is also easy to get help with mathematica over at mathematica.stackexchange.
The included image was entirely produced via a few lines of mathematica code, for example:
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I know that [TikZ](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX/PGF/TikZ) was mentioned already, but I think it deserve its own answer. It is different from `Omnigraffle` just like `TeX` is different from `Word`. But, if you're up for the effort, you'll enjoy the freedom of producing extremely high quality figures!
True, using `TikZ` for "heavy" diagrams can lead to lengthy compilations, but this can be solved using the `externalize` library of `TikZ`, or the `Standalone` class. See also [this](https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/142479/412) possible approach using `make`.
Although `TikZ` is not at all WYSIWYG, there are several editors, that enable the use to draw "by hand" the diagram and export it to a `Tikz` snippet. Personally, I don't have experience with this kind of combination.
Another advantage of `TikZ`, that as it is somewhat a programing language (after all `TeX` is turing-complete) you can program your diagram and use external data sources and visualize them. To that end, you can use a combination of `TeX`, `lua` or other languages of your choice.
Finally, and most important; `TikZ` provides an amazing live community which can help you with everything related to it. A perfect starting point would be the [TeX.se](https://tex.stackexchange.com/).
PS: You can also have a look at `pstricks`. It implements a similar spirit like `TikZ` but... Well, I'm not using it so I cannot say much. I can say, that I saw amazing outputs of `pstricks`.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: [GeoGebra](http://www.geogebra.org/cms/en/info) is free and multi-platform dynamic mathematics software for all levels of education that joins geometry, algebra, tables, graphing, statistics and calculus in one easy-to-use package. Constructions can be made with points, vectors, segments, lines, polygons, conic sections, inequalities, implicit polynomials and functions. All of them can be changed dynamically afterwards. Elements can be entered and modified directly on screen, or through the Input Bar. GeoGebra has the ability to use variables for numbers, vectors and points, find derivatives and integrals of functions and has a full complement of commands like Root or Extremum. Teachers and students can use GeoGebra to make conjectures and prove geometric theorems.
To add something that I personally liked a lot, it has the ability to generate TikZ code for any drawing made using the software! Also, the community recently completed a kick-starter campaign, in which they raised enough funds for an IPad version of the software, to be also available for free!
[EDIT] - The tablet app is available now, both in App Store and Google Play!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: All ways that username_14w you to produce the graphic you want is what you should use. I have used many different software over the years. I have gradually abandoned ones when I found better alternatives.
I usually make "raw" data plots using Matlab and then use Adobe Illustrator to put the finishing touches to them (Inkscape or Corel draw would work equally well). The benefit of doing things this way is, for me, that I can add material from different sources or plots in layers and change them as I see fit. I am sure this can be accomplished in other ways but I have found my way to the final product. I also happen to like messing with graphics so that helps me to explore new ways.
I also use LaTeX and TikZ (which has been mentioned in replies) and so as I see it there is obviously no single way to generate the graphics but you need to chose the best ones. In my case: Illustrator (alt. Inkscape, Corela Draw), matlab, TikZ, and Photoshop (alt. Gimp) for photographic manipulation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: The vector graphics language [`Asymptote`](http://asymptote.sourceforge.net/) is a very nice tool for both 2D and 3D images. From its website:
>
> Asymptote is a powerful descriptive vector graphics language that
> provides a natural coordinate-based framework for technical drawing.
> Labels and equations are typeset with LaTeX, for high-quality
> PostScript output.
>
>
>
Checkout a [gallery](http://asymptote.sourceforge.net/gallery/) for samples. Just like TeX, you can "program" your image and obtain exactly what you want.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: TikZ/PGF is great when you get it to work. However, designing your stuff in this language can really be frustrating at times. If you want something a little bit easier to learn, but you still want to program your illustrations rather than drawing them yourself, check out [Processing](http://processing.org/). There are a lot of excellent [tutorials](http://processing.org/tutorials/) on this language, some of them specifically aimed towards people with no prior programming experience (for example [this one](http://hello.processing.org/)).
If you want to check out what some examples of what Processing is capable of (and how you can do it yourself), take a look at [this page](http://processing.org/examples/). As an added bonus, if you learn processing, you can later use it for creating animations, interactive applications, games, and similar things, some of which might be useful in a scientific context.
Some random examples of what Processing can do:
Also, check out [this video](https://vimeo.com/34528189) for an example of an animation with Processing, and [this video](https://vimeo.com/66775875) for a tutorial on how to use Processing for data visualization.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_11: I really like using [yEd](http://www.yworks.com/en/products_yed_about.html) for flow charts. You can easily arrange lot's of components, which is quite a pain if the tool does not provide functionality to do that (Inkscape does for example, but yEd does this even better). Also, the connections between components remain fixed, so rearranging a graph does not require you to redraw the connections. The tool is available for Linux, Mac and Windows.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: To add to the mix, there are online diagramming tools available as well, namely [Gliffy](http://www.gliffy.com) and [LucidChart](http://www.lucidchart.com). Both have free subscriptions that username_14w limited use which is usually sufficient for simple diagrams. With these tools, you draw the diagram in your browser and can download it as PNG, PDF or JPEG. LucidChart username_14ws a free upgrade if you register using a `*.edu.*` email address.
Another good offline tool is [Microsoft Visio](http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/visio/) which works on Windows only. It is great for drawing flow charts and other simple diagrams. There are many Visio clones but none of them live up to the original. In fact, I stumbled upon the above online tools looking for Visio alternatives for Linux.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_13: Maybe I missed it but for any workflow diagram (and not only, I do all kind of diagrams with it), I'd also mention [draw.io](https://github.com/jgraph/drawio) (which is open source and can be [installed from Flathub](https://flathub.org/apps/details/com.jgraph.drawio.desktop)), and its online version [app.diagrams.net](https://app.diagrams.net/).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_14: A rather new option for creating illustrations for geometric objects is [Penrose](https://penrose.cs.cmu.edu/). It is able to generate nice figures for different objects described in a mathematical notation. See the [paper](https://penrose.cs.cmu.edu/siggraph20) for examples and more explanation.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/12 | 1,851 | 7,703 | <issue_start>username_0: I know PhD is unsparing in terms of available time, but at times there may be situations that demand some extra income, for example, family situations or some medical emergency.
In such cases, are there any specific jobs PhD students could take up? This could be at some place within a university (a library, say) or somewhere in the city (assume it is a large one like London or NY). The desiderata are minimal time consumption and a sum of useful money which could be used to manage the unexpected expense.<issue_comment>username_1: Two obvious answers are:
1. Marking (grading). Ask your supervisor if they have coursework that needs to be marked (for a price).
2. Tutoring. Put a note up in your departmental office offering to tutor undergraduates. If you're doing a more mathematical degree, you could tutor undergraduates from other disciplines. For example, helping out with some statistics coursework.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. I know of a few graduate students who successfully made money doing consulting in their line of work. Most of these were engineering students, where the knowledge gained during graduate school is easily transferable, but I've seen others as well.
If you're interested in this, talk to as many people as you can and network, network, network. It can be a fun side project with the potential to become a full-time job if you're interested.
2. Another very useful skill that some graduate students may be able to do is [grant writing](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grant_writing). While you may not realize it, this skill is necessary in many, many industries, and if you're good at writing, you can make earn some good income contracting out your skills.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It would depend on whether you are an international student or a domestic student.
I am guessing, if you are an international student, you will have to work with your international office to work more than your *allowed* quota of hours citing extenuating circumstances.
For instance, as a PHD candidate from India in the USA, I know that I get a stipend that counts as 20 hours of work per week. If I were to have, God forbid, extenuating circumstances and needed more money to support my cause, I'd have to work with the international office who in turn would work it out with the INS/ICE in the US so that I stay "in status" as a full time student **whilst working for more than my quota of hours**.
Obviously, my answer is for international students in the US. If you are a domestic student, some of the answers provided here would actually help!
Good luck!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: These are less attractive than either consulting or tutoring because they take a more regular committment, but these are jobs I have taken in the past for a few extra dollars (that haven't managed to kill me yet!)
* Being an adjunct teacher at another institution.
This is very hard though, and requires a substantial time commitment. It has the positive benefit of you gaining teaching experience, which is useful if you plan on continuing a job in academia. I have also heard teaching online classes are much easier on your schedule as well, although take that as heresay from me as I have not done it myself.
* Moonlighting as a security guard.
This probably comes off as an odd choice, but I have had two security guard jobs in the past that worked out really well. I intentionally chose jobs that I sat at a desk, so I could read or write while I was on duty. I'm sure your mileage varies though with this, and I may have just been crap lucky with getting jobs in which this was possible.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: At my university, the school provides service for students with disabilities,
any I have been a mentor/tutor for some of them.
It is quite fun, and more importantly, I feel like I do something meaningful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: **Writing high-school or college-level books** in your discipline. There are quite a few types of books that publishers are interested in and pay young authors for: exercises with solutions, compilations of admissions tests with answers and comments, that sort of thing.
I mention it because it usually is a job you can do on your own schedule. In my own experience, it does not pay as much as consulting, but it might be easier to get in. Also, it brings a lot of useful experience if you do it in a good team: learning how to write good pedagogical material is a precious skill!
---
Depending on your language skills, working as a **translator** or **proofreader** is a good option. It is a rather flexible job in term of work hours and place. Also, if you have necessary technical skills, scientific journals have large needs of **grahics editing**.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: depending on your major and skills, I believe you can find some teaching positions. like ESL, math, computer science etc. whatever you can teach, look for companies offering that kind of service. I was working as an instructor at a "computing for children" kinda company. using available software, it was fun to work with kids. I was also teaching A+,N+ classes, since I am a CS graduate and like to teach the stuff.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: If you have the time and ability to - start a business in your disipline! I know this is a hard task but I managed to set at home accountancy and consulting business while a undergraduate (Accounting major and also a Computer Science). You can recruit people to work on commission for you, thus creating money for themselves and you! I have always been a fan of consulting and recruitment (headhunting) business start ups.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Online tutoring and teaching - It can be less time consuming especially in the area of their expertise. Good instructors are scarce and they are online and offline companies that are always looking for quality instructors. Companies like [General Assembly](https://generalassemb.ly/), [Udemy], [Venturesity](http://www.venturesity.com/) (sorry for the shameless plug :)) etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Look into babysitting. A lot of professors and staff are looking for reliable people to babysit (and maybe tutor) their young children. That is how I supplemented my income through graduate school.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: **Private tutoring** can be a good source of income -- getting pupils is difficult at first, but most of them will, once started, have many lessons, so there is some regularity in your income. If you want to reduce your hours, raising your rates can do the trick nicely (since you are an expert professional, you can and should charge a high hourly rate in any case, otherwise people will assume you are not very good).
**Proof-reading and editorial work** is flexible (because you can do it at any time of day or night), although it does not tend to be particularly lucrative. That said, if relevant to your field, a track record of such work can do wonders for your reputation and visibility.
**Other specialist freelance activities** relevant to your field. These tend to be brief and one-off, but can be very enjoyable and quite lucrative.
[NB: since all of the above tend to involve working in a self-employed capacity, it is **your** responsibility to register with the relevant tax authorities, file tax returns, and pay the taxes (this is one reason why self-employed hourly rates tend to be significantly higher than employed hourly rates). If you feel uncomfortable doing these administrative tasks yourself, you may want to hire an accountant.]
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/10 | 1,795 | 7,561 | <issue_start>username_0: I have read other threads along similar lines but I am looking for slightly different advice. And I am posting this anonymously because I would rather my current employer did not find out my intentions!
So, I have a bachelors and a masters degree in computer engineering and currently work in one of the top microprocessor companies, which would otherwise be considered the "dream job" for someone with my degrees. However, every day I realize how much I miss Math and really want to go back and have an opportunity to work more with math, particularly in the field of numerical analysis, scientific computing, matrix algebra and the like.
Supporting factors -
* I have always done well in math. I can get great recommendation letters from math professors I have taken courses with.
* I am a CRLA level 3 certified math tutor. I used to be one when in undergrad.
* I am preparing for Math GRE and am confident I can do well in it.
* Good undergrad math and engineering GPA.
* My masters thesis involved quite a bit of dealing with numbers, since I worked with various LINPACK benchmarks and linear algebra solvers.
Negative factors -
* I am not from a very highly reputed school.
* I have not published any papers, even though I did write a thesis for my MS in Computer Engineering.
* My math courses are the basic math courses engineering students take, along with graduate level math courses in numerical analysis, scientific computing and the like.
How do I go about getting a PhD admit in a reputed Math graduate school? How do I begin to convince professors / hiring committees that I am capable of doing a PhD in Math? I am only looking at quitting my company and switching to PhD studies around either of Fall 2013 or Fall 2014, so I have time. What are some extra-curricular 'outside my day job' activities I can pursue that would further solidify my application in the meantime?<issue_comment>username_1: A concern (raised by your background) that occurs to me is that do you really have a clear idea what graduate programs in math are all about? I don't think that any reputable grad school would allow you to study numerical analysis alone ... [Edit taking note of Willie's remark] *within a graduate program in pure math* - the scene is markedly different if you are applying into a program in applied and/or computational math. I apologize for not knowing that such possibilities exist. My smalltown background left me with the false impression that math and applied math always come together. Such programs may be better suited for you![/Edit] (continued rant) ... For the simple reason that doing research in math requires familiarity with a variety of tools and theories from adjacent, nearby and occasionally relatively remote areas of mathematics.
Is entering a computer science/computer engineering graduate program not an option? Probably you can specialize in scientific computing/numerical analysis in such a program. It may actually be easier to find an advisor in such a topic at a CS department? I don't know for sure, but it sounds like such a plan would entail less risk.
Our resident experts on numerical analysis/scientific computing can give you more useful advice. Below I will say my bit.
---
Before you burn your boats I would recommend, as an extra-curricular activity, that you take a look at what the obligatory 1st year courses of math programs have in store for you.
The *core math* at a typical US grad school (for 1st year grad students) contains at lest [topology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topology), [abstract algebra](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_algebra), [real analysis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measure_%28mathematics%29) (sorry the link is only to measure theory, couldn't find a more fitting Wikipedia article at this time) and [complex analysis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_analysis). Some places would offer/recommend/require also [mathematical logic](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_logic). After the first year, you are expected to display a working understanding of the theories and results that those articles link to, and be able to reproduce their proofs on demand (ok, the committees will likely give you some slack on the more esoteric proofs, but don't count on it). The depth of those course probably depends on how much ivy the school has. I cannot give details on that for the simple reason that my experience is from a reputable but not top notch grad school, and I have only heard rumors about the others :-).
Only after having covered those basics can you start specializing on a topic that interests you the most.
I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm. I just had a few fellow grad students who were surprised by the graduate curriculum, and either dropped out or had a hard time making through the 1st year. My concern is that you may not fully appreciate how limited your exposure to math actually is (given your background). GRE is a joke, but it does test that you can speedily pick the correct calculus concept/theorem off the shelf in your brains and apply it.
So if going through those links just makes you hungry to learn more, then 'full steam ahead!', but otherwise you may want to reconsider.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Pure mathematics isn't your only choice for a PhD, and may not be the best fit with a computer engineering background.
I'm currently a masters student in a MS/PhD program in [computational engineering](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_Science_and_Engineering) after getting a B.S. in applied math. Computational engineering is very different from computer engineering. It is a field which combines numerical analysis, linear algebra and parallel programming to solve engineering problems which are typically modeled as coupled systems of partial differential (or integral) equations.
In [my program](http://www.utc.edu/Academic/ComputationalEngineering/), the focus is on fluid dynamics, but there are others that focus on geophysics, structural dynamics, electromagnetics, etc. One of the advantages of this program is that it brings together people from mathematics, engineering and computer science, both in faculty and students, so you get a different perspective on problems than you would working strictly with other mathematicians.
If this sounds interesting, you may want to check out the [Computational Science](https://scicomp.stackexchange.com/) board here on Stack Exchange.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know howto respond individually, so I am just going to respond here all together.
@Willie, thanks, I have registered an account now.
@Zev, thanks for migrating to academia. I didn't know this site even existed till now, and I am hooked. I will be posting with my regular SO account here :)
@Tonymac, computational engineering would be ideal. That's exactly the kind of thing I am looking for as well, and that's precisely what excited me during my undergrad days and motivated me to take a lot of math grad courses as electives in my undergrad program.
Coming back, let me re-emphasize. I am currently employed, just moved to Austin, Tx. I am only going to be applying for Fall 2014 for the most part, and that gives me an year to prepare. My question is, how do I "best" use the time till then? There are some advise I have seen on here that say "use your time productively". What would "productively" be in this case? What are the things I could do in the meanwhile to improve my application when I do apply?
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/13 | 492 | 2,117 | <issue_start>username_0: Suppose that I've helped other researchers with the statistical analyses for an epidemiological study and therefore I am acknowledged for that in the "Acknowledgments" section of the paper (something like "We thank *andrea* for his statistical support").
Obviously, this doesn't count as a publication for me, as I am not one of the authors. But if I include it in my CV, how much "weight" would a professor (or someone within the academia) give to that? I also have other publications where I am either the first author or one of the co-authors.
I am not thinking of a particular situation here (like applying for a grant or for a PhD position). I am just curious to know if it could be useful to put it into my CV or if it would just be irrelevant.<issue_comment>username_1: I've never seen anything like this on a CV.
If you have other publications, I certainly wouldn't include this. It would look like you are trying too hard to find something to put on your CV, which could do more harm than good. Let your publications stand for themselves.
One thing you could do when describing the various jobs you've had, is to include the statistical analysis work in the description of the activities you performed in that job. You could also mention it in the cover letter, if it is relevant for the job. Finally, do bring it up in the interview as an example of how you work in a collaboration.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think it might be appropriate to put this on your CV is you are *very* early in your career, and facing the "There's nothing but coursework on my CV" problem. If that's the case, it might be worth doing just to show that you're in the early stages of your research career, but that you are engaging in collaborative research work.
That being said, the moment you have something more substantial to put on your CV, I'd expect it to drop away in favor of those things.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You can ask these researchers to give you a recommendation letter. This may help you even more than another publication.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/14 | 2,797 | 11,834 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a master's degree in Computer Science. I have applied to PhD programs, and decisions are trickling in. I may soon have to choose between two or more PhD programs. I am outside of the US.
Unfortunately, I have diverse interests. I was advised that a successful PhD application is usually quite specific, so I made each of my applications very specific. I wrote to a professor working in decision making (AI), another working in computational learning theory, another working in computer music, another working in quantum & parallel computing, another working in logical foundations & philosophy of computation. With much enthusiasm, I informed each professor that I was interested in pursuing a PhD in his / her field. This is **true**. I am interested in **each** of these fields, and know something about each of them. When advised to apply, I did.
The problem is - being interested in each of these fields also means that I'm interested in **all** of them. (There are **more** areas of CS I'm interested in. What's worse - my interests are not even restricted to CS. For the purposes of this post, I'm restricting myself to only the mentioned areas.) So when I choose between PhD programs, I'm choosing between completely different areas - and that is surely going to be excruciating.
This is **not** a case of not knowing my 'true interest' now, only to discover it later. I have **no** 'true interest'. I have always pursued numerous unrelated things in parallel. I love all my interests equally. In fact, I love the feeling of 'being interested' more than the interests themselves. Whenever I've tried to restrict myself to **one** topic of study - even for a month - that feeling is lost, and I am quickly bored. As a result, my skill-set is a classic case of a jack of all trades - master of none. The worst part is - everybody knows that a PhD is about getting deep into **one** specific topic. It's not about breadth - it's about depth. Even if I were to choose one of the PhD programs (and I **must** choose one), I have a feeling that I might get bored quickly and be prone to constant topic-changing / transferring. Again, this is not about being fickle - it's about following my heart, and my heart takes me to different things at different times.
Do you think I'm likely to fail / never complete my PhD? What are the best practices for dealing with diverse interests?
**Update (2018)**: The good news is that I received my Ph.D. last year. The bad news is that many of the concerns I described in this question did rear their ugly heads in grad school (for example I became one of those PhD students who reads and reads and reads many things but doesn't get actual research done). Though I managed to graduate, the quality of work leaves much to be desired, and I am currently facing a difficult job search, and beginning to suspect that I have no future in research.<issue_comment>username_1: (My experience with non-American PhD programs is limited, so some of what I say here may not be relevant or possible.)
First, I think you may have painted yourself into a corner. More important than being specific, PhD applications should be *honest*. Hopefully your applications described the breadth of your interests, perhaps with some extra emphasis and detail in one area, rather than implying falsely that you are only interested in one topic. It's better to be rejected than to be accepted into a PhD program where you won't thrive.
I think you need to look for overlaps and connections between your various fields of interest. Decision theory and machine learning are not that far apart. Quantum computing and philosophy of computing are not that far apart. Parallel computing and logic are not that far apart. Decision theory and logic are not that far apart. Machine learning and computer music are not that far apart. Finding something at the intersection of five or six different areas is almost certainly impossible, but **lots** of interesting stuff happens at the interface between field X and field Y.
On the other hand, all the areas you describe are incredibly diverse within their own boundaries. You may find enough different topics within (say) machine learning to keep your fickle heart satisfied.
One thing you should ask about (quickly!) is the possibility of having multiple (ie, two) advisors in different areas. Some departments encourage inter-disciplinary co-advising; some don't. Some advisors encourage collaboration with other faculty; others flatly forbid it. (In many European PhD programs, students are attached to specific projects of specific faculty from day one, and moving between projects or fields is almost impossible.)
What worries me more than the diversity of your interests is this sentence: *"Whenever I've tried to restrict myself to one topic of study - **even for a month** - that feeling is lost, and I am quickly bored"*. You have to get over that. Research requires long-term focused attention. Early in your PhD program, you *may* be able to juggle a couple of different research projects at once, but eventually, you have to focus on a coherent thesis topic. It can be an interdisciplinary topic, sure, but it has be coherent. You will have to work on that one topic for *years*. If that sounds awful to you, then maybe you don't want to be a PhD student after all.
My department head has changed fields several times in his career, so I think his advice on this topic is worth repeating. Assuming good health and good luck, you have a 50-year research career ahead of you. So if you're deeply interested in half a dozen different areas, you can afford to spend seven or eight years on each one.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'd start with a fundamental question: why do you want to get a Ph.D.? It's a major commitment of time and effort, so it's only worthwhile if you need a Ph.D. to accomplish your long-term goals. Getting a Ph.D. really isn't worth doing for its own sake, or out of a feeling that it's something you ought to do (because you like computer science, or enjoy education, or feel you should have the highest degree you can get). Really, it's just preparation for what you'll do after you graduate.
So from this perspective, the question becomes what you hope to be doing in ten or fifteen years. Not specific topics, but rather what sort of career. When you look around at faculty or industrial researchers, do you see people who make you say "Yes, that's exactly the sort of work and the range of topics I'd love"? If you do, then you should look into these cases specifically. You can study websites and CVs, and maybe even e-mail a few questions (although keep in mind that people will be busy, so don't be pushy and don't waste time with questions you can answer in other ways). How did they end up in these positions that appeal to you?
If you can find many people doing what you'd like to do, then that's an excellent sign, and you just have to learn how they did it. If you can find only a few, or even none, then you should worry that maybe a Ph.D. isn't the right path for you. In that case, if you enter a Ph.D. program you've got to hope for one of two things. Either academia will change you, or you will change academia. Either is possible, but neither is likely.
I don't mean for this to be discouraging, but I strongly recommend thinking this through carefully before getting too far into a Ph.D. program (if you haven't already). Once you start, quitting is difficult psychologically even when it's clearly the right decision. It's easy to spend years in denial, knowing things aren't really working out the way you had anticipated but hoping they'll somehow get better. This isn't healthy, so the more thinking you do in advance, the better.
Good luck! I hope you either find role models in this career path or find another that suits you better.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It is possible that you will have trouble finishing your dissertation and thus obtaining your PhD.
It is easy to do your coursework; each subject takes only one semester. You'll finish your subjects before you get bored. But a dissertation usually takes a year or more to finish.
One possibility is to take your PhD at a university which allows publication of a few papers as equivalent to a dissertation. You can make the papers about different fields and yet related to each other.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I found your question today. I also have "diverse interests". Worse, my interests are more diverse than yours. I am interested in quantum physics, in biology, in history, in computer, in mathematics, in electronics, in music, etc.
Your problem is just in what username_1 had found: "Whenever I've tried to restrict myself to one topic of study - even for a month - that feeling is lost, and I am quickly bored". I get bored after a month of intense reading, or after half a year of leisure reading. It might be with the "instant gratification" vs "delayed gratification" kind of thing. Picking low hanging fruits in a new field is exciting. Having to do hard work for difficult fruits is boring. You might even have procrastination if my theory is right.
I worry that you might not be able to finish your Ph.D, like me. I chose one of the above as my Ph.D direction and I lost interest in reading boring (difficult?) papers and spent easy time in other fields. My GPA was good, I had no problem to pass exams. I just did not want to read those boring papers (the truth was that they were more "difficult papers" than "boring papers") in the field. I finally dropped out after years of struggling and got a job with my master's degree. Today, a day I find out that I am reading in parallel many materials on diverse topics at the same time, I decided to google and found your question.
If you can't focus, it might be better for you to get a job with your master's degree in CS and live an everyday Joe's life, like what I am doing now. On the other hand, if you can untwist your mind so that you realize that life is difficult, research is difficult, and doing difficult work is unavoidable, you might be able to escape being bored ( Now you know it is not about being bored, it is about being unable to face difficult problems for delayed gratification), you may be able to survive your Ph.D life.
**[Update after 3 years]** Today I found this answer made by me three years ago. I can tell you what I have done to overcome the problem. I am proud of myself as an amateur scientist that I have focused on one narrow field unrelated to all my previous interests for three whole years and got deep understanding of it. I almost dropped all my other hobbies and interests. How?
The first reason why I can make this change to my style was three years ago I suddenly realized that the old saying that we used only 5% (or 10%) of our brain capacity thus we had enormous capacity for learning was a lie. This is easily seen if you believe in evolution (why keep an energy hungry giant brain if there is no need). The truth is we have limited memory capacity. Don't jam garbage information in it! The second reason is somehow related ---- Those highly respected big figures in the past had limited brain capacity too! I believe if a person with good IQ and required education spends 10 years (sometimes 3 years) focusing on on topic, he can surpass almost all past and existing experts in the field, except for maybe one or two greatest.
With this second reason in mind (Most great figures are average Joe's themselves) I think I have made a discovery in a field I once was interested in. I have to pick it up and set aside my current main focus for a while (maybe as long as a year). Hope the above two reasons can help some people here.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/15 | 1,221 | 5,122 | <issue_start>username_0: While multitasking is not a desired trait unique to academia, it's something that seems particularly important for graduate students and new faculty. I've had many students ask me how to multitask effectively, and I'm curious to know what the collective wisdom of this forum would be.
>
> what are good practices to manage multiple distinct academic
> activities effectively ?
>
>
>
To make this more focused and relevant, I'll limit academic activities to
* Taking (or teaching) classes
* Working on multiple research projects
* Writing grant proposals (or applying for fellowships)
* service responsibilities
* a healthy lifestyle with outside hobbies<issue_comment>username_1: Different people would have different techniques. What I found very useful for me is to have a list of the 5-8 most important things I need to do.
I don't use any specific tool, just a simple text file to write my tasks down (always adding tasks so I will not forget anything), but keep the most urgent 5-8 tasks at the top.
I found out that the sole existence of this list is what helps me to focus. I don't follow the list item by item; I do jump between tasks; I start one task before I complete the the other. The important thing is that I keep looking at that list several times a day, recalling what else I still need to do, and trying to see the 'big picture'. Each time I look at the list I allow myself to re-prioritize tasks. Sometimes just to see the tasks written down is enough for one's mind to be able to arrange the day in the most effective way.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have three answers to this question; I'll put them all here for you.
1. Don't.
======
Multi-tasking is a necessity when there are many tasks that demand your attention all at once. The people who most need these skills are either managers, whose work demands that they divide their attention among their subordinates as necessary, and those working in a highly collaborative environment, where interaction with colleagues happens regularly.
As a graduate student, this will almost never happen. Your responsibilities will typically include coursework, teaching assistantships, and research duties, and writing. Even your collaborations will happen at a slow pace. You'll rarely be in a situation where you *need* to get in touch with someone within the hour; almost all your issues will be able to wait a day. Considering that almost all research shows that multitasking decreases productivity, consider yourself lucky.
To that end, if you can train yourself to focus on a single task at a time, your work will benefit from it.
2. [Pomodoro technique](http://www.pomodorotechnique.com/)
=======================================================
I recently (~6 mos) read about this technique online, and I've found it very useful for certain tasks. The concept is ridiculously simple. Before you start working, write down the task you're about to start on a piece of paper. Start a 25 minute timer and work until it runs out. Take a 5 min stretch, put a tic next to the task on the piece of paper, and then repeat until you're done. If you need to switch to something else, write it down on the paper as well, and switch every 25 minutes. This way, you always have at least 25 minutes to do each task, and you can set up your multitasking in 25 minute chunks. (As an added benefit, you're taking stretch breaks every 5 minutes, which is good for your health.)
3. [Getting Things Done](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Things_Done)
=======================================================================
There's an answer below that mentions this, but doesn't do it justice. I've been using this for years and it's a wonderful way of keeping track of what you need to do. At it's simplest, the technique just advocates that you make a to-do list of everything you need to do. The useful part of this technique is how he separates tasks; he puts them into "contexts", which you can think of as "environments". Some tasks will be done at home, some at work, some wherever you have email access, etc. By breaking up tasks like this, you can easily see what you need to do at any given time by simply consulting the correct list.
This technique has gained immense popularity, and because of that many to-do lists online feature "GTD compatibility". This basically means that they let you make lists of your to-dos.
This method comes with a catch; if you don't do it rigorously, you may as well not do it at all. As soon as some tasks *aren't* on your lists, then you'll stop checking the lists, and then the whole thing goes to pot. However, if you keep the lists current, then it's an immensely helpful technique. For forgetful people like me, the to-do concept is a veritable necessity, and the context idea is a good way of segmenting what you need to do.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In writing papers about finished projects, it is important to take breaks - write something, and then get back to it next day (re-read what you wrote). So multitasking could be beneficial.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/15 | 1,482 | 5,832 | <issue_start>username_0: In programming there are many [hackathons](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hackathon) - intense voluntary one day-week events, where participants collaboratively attack problems. They may be proposed by a company, NGO, participants or a group; for qualification/profit, for fun or for a good cause (eg. <http://www.rhok.org/>).
The question is - are there any similar events in science?
If not, what can be done or why it cannot work?
(As a comment: as I observe, while scientist are open-minded for a discussion, they are conservative, when it comes to action; at least much more than some of the programmers.)
EDIT (much later):
There *are* such events, even if extremely rare, e.g.:
* <NAME>, [Hacking science: the intersection of web geeks and science geeks](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/08/29/hacking-science-the-intersection-of-web-geeks-and-science-geeks/), [Scientific American](http://www.scientificamerican.com/) (August 29, 2011)
>
> So how can we continue to make science more disruptively accessible across all science disciplines, geographies, industries and skill-sets?
>
>
> Enter [Science Hack Day](http://sciencehackday.com/), a 48-hour-all-night event that brings together designers, developers, scientists and other enthusiastic geeks in the same physical space for a brief but intense period of collaboration, hacking, and building ‘cool stuff’. A hack is a unique modification, an interesting mashup or a quick solution to a problem – maybe not the most elegant solution, but often the cleverest. By having a fresh set of eyes from those who solve different types of problems across a variety of industries inside and outside of science, new concepts often emerge and can go on to influence science and adults’ relationship to science in unexpected ways.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: In math we have various programs where a group of people get together to do focused work on a problem, usually at one of the mathematical institutes (I know of the SQuaREs program at AIM and the Research in Pairs program at Oberwolfach, and there are probably others). These are usually for 2-6 people, and the time frame is longer.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have found, having participated in a few fairly intensive workshops that were intended to produce a product after a short amount of time that this tends toward failure for a few reasons:
* Most academics are interested in *problems* as well as the implementation of solutions. Hackatons are *implementation* factories, but its only a small subset of academics who will enjoy and/or be supported just to solve other people's problems.
* Building on that, its hard to formulate a meaningful problem, do the background research, plan the research and perform it in a one or two week period. A hackathon benefits from having all but the last stage done before-hand. Generally I've found with those types of intensive workshops, you can get the concept and maybe the plan down, but there needs to be more work done when everyone goes home. A lot more work. Which leads to the final issue...
* Long distance collaboration, especially with people with whom you have a fairly weak bond, and especially one without strong, lasting grant support, is really, really hard to do.
So they do happen, but the finished-product focused ones tend to have a longer timeframe, and the shorter ones tend to be trying to accomplish very specific things, like putting out a consensus statement or *planning* research to be done later.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In industrial math, Oxford has a long tradition of running [study groups](http://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/groups/occam/study-groups). This vague-sounding name has a rather specific meaning. From the page just linked:
>
> **What is a study group?**
>
>
> Study groups bring together mathematicians from across the globe to
> work on mathematical problems presented by industry in a week long
> workshop.
>
>
> **How does a study group work?**
>
>
> The academics work in problem solving teams with the presenters to
> tackle the problems raised, formulating their ideas using modelling,
> analysis and computation. At the end of the study group the academics
> present their findings and make suggestions of future work to be
> carried out. A final report is written after the study group.
>
>
>
I attended [this one](http://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/groups/occam/events/first-kaust-study-group-mathematics-industry). They are a lot of fun and have a track record of real impact.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I shall argue that [iGEM](http://igem.org/Main_Page) falls under the category of a Hackathon. Having coached a team, I have grown the impression that the program essentially gathers a bunch of undergrads together, teaches them various problematic things about biology, and then for 10 weeks the students slash together a random assortment of solutions and call it a day.
Like EpiGrad, I have evolved to not favor this type of approach. Many times the students will take on a problem without recognizing that it is actually isn't a real problem. The result is a solution that tends to be very very narrowly constrained. Secondly, unlike a programming Hackathon, these sessions result in tons of hastily performed experiments with very few controls and lots of very difficult to reproduced data. Notably the [Registry of Biological Parts](http://partsregistry.org/Main_Page) is having a serious issue with the quality control of their "parts" since they all come from unsequenced plasmids that were shipped to the Registry to qualify for the deadline.
The positive is that it does get a lot of young students interested in science but it isn't a very productive way of doing science.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/15 | 1,508 | 6,446 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a economics major student who will be applying for PhD programmes pretty soon. I am quite interested in economics, but I find myself even more interested things related to probability theory, such as stochastic processes. And if I ever get into a econ PhD programme, I'm pretty sure that I should be looking for co-advising from the math/statistics department if allowed.
So I am curious about what happens in academia if you ever find yourself more interested in a topic that you don't have a degree on. If you can write some good papers during your PhD, can you find good career opportunities in that field in academia even if you did not start out as a "professional" scholar in that field?
Any idea would be very much appreciated!!<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is possible to cross over between different fields following the PhD-level studies. However, in general, this tends to be more applicable to "interdisciplinary" fields that can fall into multiple disciplines. For instance, the engineering department I studied at hired people with PhD's in applied mathematics and physics, because their research fields—in fluid mechanics and interfacial science, respectively—meshed well with the research interests of the department.
To give a counterexample, however, it will be much harder to make the case for a high-energy physics person to move into another discipline, just because it is so strongly identified with physics.
Thus, if you have a PhD in a field such as mathematical economics or econometrics, it will be a lot easier to make the lateral shift. However, if you're in a more "traditional" subfield, that move becomes much more challenging.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One additional difficulty of doing this, which may indeed be a hurdle, is that it will be difficult to teach undergraduate courses within the new department, because you may not have the background to do so. This will cause a course assignment problem for the head of department, one which could be avoided by not hiring you. On the other hand, you will be capable of teaching cross-disciplinary courses giving the education provided by the department a new angle, which may be appealing to the department.
[<NAME>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duncan_J._Watts), of Six Degrees fame, switched from Physics to Sociology. It's hard to imagine a more extreme cross-over.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Moving from an economics Ph.D. program to a job in a mainstream math department will be difficult. There will be the practical difficulties (are you able to teach as broad a range of courses?), the incentive issues ("If he's so great, why doesn't the economics department hire him instead? What's in it for us? If he's really a mathematician, why did he go to grad school in economics in the first place?"), culture clashes (mathematicians will have no idea what a working paper is, won't know whether the American Economic Review is any good, won't recognize the names of letter writers from economics or care as much about their opinions, etc.), and so on.
If you turn out to be a superstar, you'll have more flexibility, but anyone less gifted will have to work very hard to fit in. In particular, to have any real shot at this you'll have to:
(1) Demonstrate that you have a broad background in mathematics, in particular in the areas that are not used in economics. I.e., you'll need to study mathematics to the extent that nobody would guess you didn't go to math grad school.
(2) Publish papers primarily in mathematics journals. An economics paper, even a very mathematical one in an excellent journal, will count substantially less than a mathematics paper. if you have more economics papers than mathematics papers, then mathematicians who support other candidates will use this as an argument for why the economics department would be a better fit for you. (And they will convince many people by arguing that if the economics department wants you, then the math department would get the benefit of having you around for free, and if they don't want you, then maybe that's a bad sign.)
(3) Find leading mathematicians to write letters of recommendation for you. There's a widespread belief that recommenders lower their standards a little when recommending for other departments, or may not fully understand the standards or needs of these departments, so math departments will on average pay less attention to a letter from an economist than from a mathematician.
All this is unfair, but these issues are real. If you might want to work in a different department, then you should start preparing as early as possible.
P.S. You'll also run into other cultural issues. For example, economics candidates regularly get tenure-track jobs in top departments straight out of grad school, while mathematics candidates almost never do (i.e., the number of people who do this in a typical year is 0 or 1). This may work to your advantage, for example by giving you a chance to do a postdoc and improve your credentials, but it's something you'll have to deal with.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Definitely. Economists are routinely hired at finance departments, as well as public policy, public health, and even marketing departments. Sometimes they have appointments across different departments including statistics. For instance <NAME> has appointments in the Department of Economics at Penn, as well as the Finance Department and Statistics Department at Wharton.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: My father, a retired engineering professor, told me that some fields that are "feeder" fields into others, lend themselves more easily to the "crossover" process.
In your case, mathematics is a "feeder" field to mathematical economics. My father felt that it was relatively easy for a math (or engineering) PhD to cross over into economics (as he did in his later years), because most economists feel that their field does not have enough mathematics. In fact, many senior economics professors of his time recruited graduate students with strong "quant" backgrounds to work with them.
The reverse is not true. Most mathematicians would find it hard to take an Economics PhD "seriously" as a mathematician. It is said that mathematics is the "queen" of sciences, so its practitioners don't feel the need to cater to "lesser" fields.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/16 | 643 | 2,826 | <issue_start>username_0: It's well-known that many grad schools (especially top-ranked) require some research experience from prospective students and consider this as main criterion for accept/reject decision.
During undergraduate study I was working on my research (hadn't finished it - had solved just one particular case) - but can't say it was great research. Now I work as software developer in subdivision of national Academy of Science. My position requires only coding, no problem solving (there's no projects here requiring any fundamential research).
How can I make any research (better related to my field of interests) without being undergrad or MS student, without working in lab. Can I simply choose interesting problem (e.g. my undegrad problem), work hard to solve it and then refer to that in research statement? Who should write letter of recommendation in this case? Or I must have any advisor (who can verify my results and then write recommendation letter for me)? Can it be unofficial advisor (just researcher I know well)?<issue_comment>username_1: From my experience, there are three reasons why potential advisors want to see undergraduate research:
1. Show that the student cares enough about research to actually have participated in research during their undergraduate years.
2. Student is at least somewhat familiar with the ins-and-outs of performing academic research in a university setting.
3. The quality of the performed research may give some indication as to how "good" of a student the candidate will be.
If you perform research yourself outside of the university settings, you'll provide a strong showing for (1), nothing at all for (2), and given that you're unlikely to publish anything, nothing of much use to the advisor for (3).
To that end, I would try to get a job as a research assistant before applying. (I'm not sure this position exists in all fields.) This is usually a paid position, and will give you an experience to work with research, help run a lab, learn about academia, and and even possibly work towards being acknowledged--or even possibly a co-author, although that's unlikely--in a paper. It should help your application significantly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You can consider the possibility of **becoming a research assistant or research associate** in the research group you want to join, before applying for Phd program.
You can try to contact the reseach group leader and ask him/her if they have possibility (i.e. funding) and willing to assume you for some months as research associate. By this way, the group is able to know you and test you; you're able to work, get paid, do research, publish papers, and so **reinforce** your PhD candidacy.
Them, when the Phd announcement will be out, you'll be a A-star candidate ;-)
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/16 | 660 | 2,812 | <issue_start>username_0: Plenty of advice is available for standard interviews, should phone/Skype interviews be approached any differently?
(This was asked on twitter by @emilyandthelime, I have my own, partial answer that I'll post)<issue_comment>username_1: A major difference from an in-person interview is that interpersonal visual cues such as eye contact are absent or impoverished (even in Skype, because of poorer resolution / latency / smoothness than actual reality) and a rapid verbal back-and-forth is usually impossible. So it's more difficult to assess the interviewers' reaction and when they've had enough of your answer.
Typically the interviewer(s) want to hear you talk about your research for several minutes and will ask a few rather open-ended questions that are mainly designed to get you talking. You should run with that and just keep talking and let the interviewer(s) say something when they want you to stop- it's too difficult to try to monitor their nonverbal reactions. Some candidates make the mistake of not saying much, in an attempt to not over-sell themselves or in an attempt to act suitably subordinate. The interviewer(s) really want to hear you describe your work in your own words and feel your enthusiasm and general attitude.
The interviewers themselves will realize that it's difficult to have a normal conversation rapport so don't let any awkward moments or technical difficulties stress you out, the main risk is that you won't say enough.
To show you aren't off in your own world, you can't use the normal nonverbal skills very much, therefore be paticularly sensitive to the exact questions they ask, but once you answer the specific question feel free to answer more broadly, a broad perspective tends to impress.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: When I'm preparing for a phone interview, I often:
* **Write out extensive notes**. Partly, this helps me to organize my thoughts (which is good preparation for any interview), but in the case of a phone call, I **actively consult them during the interview**.
* For example, I **write out answers to questions that I think I may be asked**. When I'm asked one of these questions, I **quickly skim my written answer to remind me** of what I want to say.
* If possible, beforehand I also **write out the names of the committee that will be interviewing me**, as well as a few comments on each committee member if possible. This can help me to keep track of my interviewers, even when I can't see their faces.
* Finally, I will sometimes print out or **take notes on information about the school that I'm interviewing with**. Then, when they ask me question for which I don't have notes, I consult my notes on the school and try to work some of that information into my answer.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/04/17 | 805 | 3,349 | <issue_start>username_0: This is slightly different from [What does author order indicate?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/535/319). Our group has debated when would it be appropriate for a student or a post-doc to be considered the senior ie. the corresponding author.
As an aside, for CV building purposes, would it be more beneficial to be the first author or the last author? Does it matter if one is an academic vs. in the industry?<issue_comment>username_1: In my field (Computer Science), I usually assume that the first author and/or the "corresponding author" is the one who "did most of the work" and the last author is the one who secured the funding to do said work. In some cases the latter does not exist (*e.g.*, if a publication is not funded by a research grant/contract) or these are both the same person. In my opinion and experience, the author with the greatest technical contribution should be the corresponding author. This is because most inquiries to the corresponding author will be technical in nature. If I were interested in contacting the authors of a paper for a non-technical reason (*e.g.*, an inquiry to team for a competitive proposal) and I were unfamiliar with the authors (which is unlikely), then I would do a quick Internet search to determine if any of the authors are advisors of the others and contact the most senior one in terms of academic rank.
Therefore, I think it is perfectly appropriate and even desirable for whomever provided the greatest technical contribution to be the senior author. This may vary by discipline and/or country, however.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Assuming that you're not in a field where it's "strictly alphabetical order" (like economics), the question of which position is more important depends on what stage of your career you're in.
If you are a *beginning* academic—a PhD student or a postdoctoral fellow—then the **first**-author publications are most important, as these will show you taking an active and leading role in your research. As you move up the chain, however, and reach more senior positions, having the **last**-author credit becomes more important, as now you're showing your leadership role in directing projects. You don't want to be stuck in the trap of being a "junior" partner in research collaborations, with the senior PI getting all of the credit for the work.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: A few points.
1. Most(?) PhD students don't stay in academia. If they a planning on leaving academia for some other profession, does it really make sense for them to be a corresponding author? Once a PhD student has left Uni it's hard enough to get them motivated to write any papers, never mind answer future questions on it! Ditto for RAs, not all RAs stay in academia.
2. Let's suppose a PhD student does stay in academia and goes on to do an RA. It's unlikely to be on the same topic, so they won't be able to keep on top of the subject.
3. As @username_2 mentioned, I really don't pay attention to who the corresponding author is. If you are doing a PhD with a well known researcher, anyone who looks at the paper will automatically assume that the senior person had the original idea. The junior author gets to dispel this "myth" by giving really good presentations or by "author order".
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/17 | 1,041 | 4,724 | <issue_start>username_0: Most graduate applications provide a choice for applicants to view their recommendation letters at a later date. There is a mention of some US mandate alongside.
* Is it a better option to forgo this choice in the application? Will the recommending professor feel more secure then?
* What is the procedure for the applicant to see his/her recommendation letters? Does the university readily show them when asked?
* How ethical is it for the student to ask for the same, especially, for example, after being rejected from a program?<issue_comment>username_1: The secret to getting a good letter from someone is making sure they're going to write you a good letter before you have them write one. You should never need to look at a letter someone wrote for you, as you should basically know what they're going to write without ever having looked at it. In most cases, if someone doesn't feel comfortable writing a 100% positive letter about you, they'll let you know when you ask them and recommend you get someone else to write the letter.
With that in mind, it is definitely better to forgo this choice, for the reason you suggested... people will likely feel more comfortable to write freely and honestly when they know you won't read it. Regarding the procedure, I'm not familiar with the mandate, but if it *is* a US mandate, then they'll probably show it to you after a lot of waiting. It is definitely uncommon for someone to ask to see a letter written about them, and it likely would be looked down upon.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Among the faculty members I've known (at US research universities), there's a widespread feeling that recommendation letters should be completely confidential unless the writer chooses otherwise, and that viewing them using FERPA is unethically taking advantage of a legal loophole. Almost all the students check the waiver box, and if someone doesn't, then the letter writer is more likely to assume it was by accident than on purpose.
In this context, my advice is:
1. You should always check the box. If your recommenders believe you may look at the letters later, they will probably write weaker, vaguer letters. (For example, the most compelling letters often involve comparisons with other students, which may be omitted if you'll be reading the letter.)
2. If you are not checking the box on purpose, you should say so explicitly. If you do this silently, people may assume it was an accident, and then if they learn later that you viewed the letters, they will be more offended than if you had announced this plan in advance. (And they may actually find out, since the staff who handle your request may find it troubling and leak the information even if they aren't supposed to.)
3. You would learn less than you might expect from looking at the letters. It's remarkably hard to judge letters out of context, without having seen other letters from the same people, and it's not likely you'll discover a clear reason for your rejection. If anything, it might mislead you: you might decide that Professor X was damaging your chances by being insufficiently enthusiastic, without realizing that Professor X is never enthusiastic and in context this letter was viewed as very positive.
I think the fundamental worry many students have is of a terrible letter, a single letter that ruins what would otherwise have been a successful application. This can happen, but I see an example only once every few years. And even in those cases, it often looks like it should have been predictable to the applicant. (For example, if you have had difficulties with someone in the past but things seem better now, don't ask for a letter without a serious discussion of how they think things stand now.) So I wouldn't worry too much: the chances you could dramatically improve your application by substituting a letter are small.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: You should definitely waive access to your letters of recommendation. If you don't, the people reading the letters have reason to suspect that the writers, knowing that you might see the letter, would omit (or at least soften) any negative information that they would otherwise have included. As a result, your failure (or refusal) to waive access can weaken the letters in the eyes of the readers.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I was explicitly told by my recommending professor that you're supposed to waive your right to see the letters. In particular they said that it might not matter if your recommender is a respected individual with an established career in the field, but it definitely matters if your recommender does not carry that weight.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/17 | 725 | 3,022 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in the process of interviewing for faculty positions and trying to keep my CV up to date as I go. Should I include research (or teaching) presentations given during on-campus interviews as invited talks? Or are they considered just a part of the interview process and better left off the CV?<issue_comment>username_1: I would say **no**. Leave them off the CV.
Apart from the fact that you more-or-less invited them to invite you by applying for the position, thus they are not really invited talks, it's probably not a good idea to advertise all of the places you've unsuccessfully applied to or declined.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't say it's unethical to list them, since I think they could legitimately be considered invited talks, but I would strongly recommend leaving them out. Partly that's because it's not worth the (probably small) risk of offending someone who really doesn't think they belong there, but mainly it's because in my experience most people don't list interview talks on their CVs, so listing them will look a little unusual. In particular, it may make people wonder whether you felt you didn't have enough other talks, whether you're doing other unconventional things in your CV that they should watch out for, etc. This isn't likely to cost you a job by itself, but it's not what you want readers to be thinking about.
There's a general meta-principle here: you should make your CV look like everyone else's, not because doing it differently would be wrong, but because you don't want readers to focus on the differences.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I disagree with Dave. An invited talk is, by definition, a talk that you've been invited to give. Yes, interviews count. (More-or-less inviting yourself is not necessarily different than a non-interview invited talk.)
I agree that you shouldn't reveal *which* of your invited talks are actually interviews, but that's only an issue if all your invited talks happen in the last semester before you submit your thesis. (And maybe you should wait until after interview season is over to add them. The people who are interviewing you are *desperately* curious about where else you're interviewing.)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It depends on which CV you are talking about. Hopefully you have better things to include on a one-page CV. Everything you do belongs on your "full" CV. I put departmental seminars in a different category from conference talks. I divide up my conference talks into invited and not invited (and maybe someday keynote). Interviews talks generally either go in external departmental seminars (as opposed to internal seminars) or guest lecturing depending on if it is a research talk or teaching demo. If the interview talk is only given to the search committee, then it goes under positions interviewed for and does not make the seminar list. My full CV lives on the web, but if I am asked to send a CV I purpose tailor it.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/17 | 642 | 2,952 | <issue_start>username_0: How well accepted has been (systematic) literature reviews in your research field, these days?!
I come from computer science field, more specifically Software Engineering. Some professors I keep in touch usually ask their students to perform a systematic literature review (SLR) as a research kickoff, rather than performing any kind of unstructured review. However, it's become harder and harder to get such kind of publication accepted in a highly-ranked publication (e.g., a qualified journal or conf). My feeling is that, in a certain extent, the community has already saturated the amount of papers reporting on reviews.
Hence, I'd like to know a point of view of people from other research fields, as well as their expertise on measuring the tradeoff time devoted to conduct a SRL vs. likelihood of having such a kind of publication accepted by a good venue.<issue_comment>username_1: In Epidemiology (and medicine generally) systematic literature reviews - and the meta-analysis subset that come from systematic reviews that can report pooled summary estimates - are extremely well accepted.
A novel systematic review, while it will take some time, is generally speaking worth a publication at least somewhere - unless someone has already done said review, at which point your work is done anyway. They've also started to be parsed as "no more work than you should have been doing anyway" - in order to get good priors for Bayesian analysis, a truly comprehensive view of the literature, etc. you might very well already be doing a systematic review.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A systematic literature review is never a bad thing. At the worst, you have a large database of literature that you can cite in future work. as well as a feeling for where the "low-hanging fruit" might lie. It will also give you a framework on which to build and grow your literature collection over time.
So whether or not you are able to publish it, a literature review is a good thing (within reason—don't spend six months doing nothing but reading literature papers!).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In Mechanical/Aerospace engineering it has been my experience that most research projects start off with a systematic review. Some journals will consider such reviews for publication, but the goal is usually not a publication, but to build a background in the area and to find potential gaps in current research.
Another thing I have found helpful is to periodically review your review. This is important especially for longer term projects (PhDs, continuations/extension of previous research). I try to do a quick followup review every few months or so to make sure my review stays current. The duration between updates will vary based on the research and the discipline. Once you have the initial review in place, keeping it current should take only a little bit of time and effort.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/18 | 1,322 | 5,666 | <issue_start>username_0: How can a PhD student proceed when his/her advisor quits midway?
* What should be the student's considerations when the professor offers him a choice to move along with him? Should it be the comparative rankings of the universities? Or the relationship enjoyed with the professor thus far? Or the progress of the work?
* Do universities offer to waiver coursework and ensure faster-than-usual graduation for students accompanying new professors? Can papers published in the older university be considered a part of the thesis that will be written for the newer department?
* What should a student do if such an option is not available to the professor and also there are not other professors in the department who could or are willing to guide the student? Will the university offer a compensation for him?<issue_comment>username_1: I went through this experience, and I have friends who've gone through this experience, and it's never fun. You ask a lot of questions; I'll try to answer as many as I can.
1. >
> What should be the student's considerations when the professor offers him a choice to move along with him?
>
>
>
Consider the following:
1. How far along are you in your work? If you haven't proposed yet, it's probably easier just to find a new professor and start anew. If you haven't done any serious research yet (1-2 yrs), *definitely* find a new advisor and start fresh.
2. Did you have a good relationship with this person? Do you *want* to continue working with them?
3. Often, your credits will *not* follow you. (I don't have a source for this statement, other than I've been told by numerous people that graduate credits rarely transfer between institutions.) Make sure they will transfer, or that you will be given some sort of pass, before transferring.Other stuff (rankings, location, collaborators) should obviously be taken into account as well. In my experience, most students do not move along with their advisor.
2. >
> Do universities offer coursework waiver and faster-than-usual graduation for students accompanying new professors?
>
>
>
Almost certainly not.
>
> Can papers published in the older university be considered a part of the thesis that will be written for the newer department?
>
>
>
Probably, talk with the university before transferring.
3. >
> What should a student do if such an option is not available to the professor and also there are not other professors in the department who could/are willing to guide the student? Will the university offer a compensation for him?
>
>
>
That's pretty unusual. This happens all the time; people are familiar with the situation. In many cases, the department will be willing to help you find someone new. You should view the ordeal as identical to when you chose your initial advisor; you'll probably do (shortened) interviews with a few profs, talk to lab members, look into research, etc. The difference is that, by now, you should be familiar with those people who do research similar to what you've been doing, so your search will be easier; you'll know them, and they should know you, even if only because you've taken a class with them or something.
You will almost definitely not receive compensation. C'est la vie, my friend... welcome to the real world.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: One issue is what your advisor is doing. If your advisor is leaving academia (e.g., going to work on Wall Street or for the government), then you are probably on your own, but moving to another university is generally not a big problem.
If you haven't started doing research yet, you should probably just switch to a new advisor, but if you are already making progress, then staying with your current advisor is often the best approach.
One possibility that wasn't mentioned in your question is moving physically to the new university as a visiting student while staying enrolled at the old university. You still work on research with your advisor, and at the end receive a degree from the university you started at. Maybe it varies between fields, but this is pretty common in mathematics, and it avoids some of the difficulties like transferring credit or different requirements.
If your advisor is supportive (and they should be!), then this is generally not hard to arrange. It's easiest if they are technically going on leave from the old university, rather than resigning immediately, but that's a pretty common way to arrange moving between universities, partly because it simplifies situations like this. (And even if your advisor is not going on leave, you just need a colleague to step in as the formal advisor, while letting your advisor handle the day to day interaction.) The major reason for difficulty would be if there was some serious problem at the old university, such as a personality conflict with the department chair, which could make the department unwilling to be flexible.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I generally agree with @AnonymousMathematician that the easiest thing to do may simply be to visit the New University while staying an enrolled student at Old University. It may require checking with both departments, but then again so will and out and out transfer.
Another option that hasn't been mentioned:
It may be possible to convert your current advisor to an "outside reader" or simply a committee member who happens to have an appointment at another institution. The formal title of your "advisor" can then be switched to a member of your committee at your current institution - preferably one sympathetic and supportive of your situation.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/04/18 | 1,272 | 5,422 | <issue_start>username_0: During undergrad, students can face several opportunities, ranging from participation in (1) research groups, (2) study/training for competitions, (3) internships, (4) opening start-ups with colleagues (the latter is becoming very common these days), but I wonder, what is really important, for a Ph.D. application/admission...
By competition I mean ones like: INTEL GLOBAL CHALLENGE (VC), ACM ICPC, IMAGINE CUP (examples from the Comp. Sci. field, and Business, but indeed there may be a bunch of these in other fields, that I don't know)
Talking about (1) and (2) aforementioned...
If a student stays a long time during his/her undergrad in a (world-class) research group, he/she is likely to have the opportunity to publish a bunch of papers (some of these might be good, well-referenced, etc; some of these might be not as good), and meet some good researchers around the world, and so on; it really required dedication.
On the other hand, take part into a training class for competitions (that requires dedication, as well) may lead students to gains in terms of working in group, time-boxed activities, etc, as well as to face the opportunity of proposing solutions for real-world problems, and so on.
It is really tough to do both, in order to have great results, since in both cases time and dedication is mandatory. Indeed, there are some "outliers" students that can do both in a very good way, but I'm trying to generalize my assumption, by considering "average" students.
Hence, it's known that good papers have a great influence on the Ph.D. admission (despite of other well-known recommendations, e.g., a great GRE, good recom. letters, and so on), but I'd like to know if (and how) the universities consider students who dedicated their time to join this kind of competitions, obtaining some prizes, as a consequence, etc.<issue_comment>username_1: If a student is going to dedicate a substantial amount of time to a non-academic, non-research activity, there had better be significant attention paid to this activity in the application itself. I would want at a minimum an explanation of the time commitments and the resultant recognition obtained from these activities. An additional letter of support or clarification (or recommendation) from the advisor for such an activity would also help to assuage my concerns.
However, in general, if there is no direct correlation between the activity and the research field, I am likely to take a somewhat *negative* view of this, if it has a detrimental impact on the rest of the application. (For instance, if I were sitting on a math admissions committee, and saw someone applying who was applying for topology but spent a lot of time on some economics competition and had a weak GPA as a result, I don't think it would help the student's case much.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Competitions can be valuable evidence of achievement, but they have to be not just widely recognized, but also really relevant to the field. (Nobody cares if you're a chess champion, since you aren't going to grad school in chess, and the fact that it involves hard work and talent will not help your case; if anything, it will be viewed as a potential distraction that may cause trouble in the future.) The best case is if some of the faculty once participated in the same competition. Then they will know exactly what's involved and what success means. The next best case is if some of their current students participated. Otherwise, it will mean very little, unless your recommenders somehow make a strong case for its importance.
As a test case, let's think about the Putnam examination, which is the most prestigious math contest for undergraduates in the US and Canada. Doing well on the Putnam exam is very valuable in math grad school applications, but even being one of the winners is not a guarantee of admission. The big advantage of the Putnam is that it gives objective evidence of talent compared with a nationwide pool, but the disadvantage is that solving contest problem is really not the same thing as doing research. If an undergraduate writes a paper a faculty member would really be proud of having written, then it looks better than winning the Putnam exam, but most undergraduate papers do not rise to that level and may not be as impressive as winning the exam. It's hard to quantify this trade-off, but I would definitely not advise anyone to neglect research opportunities in order to prepare better for the Putnam. Ultimately, graduate school is about research, and admissions committees sometimes worry about applicants who look more interested in competitions than research.
The Mathematical Contest in Modeling may be more along the lines of the contests you mention: it's a multi-day, team-based contest. My impression is that it carries less weight in admissions decisions than the Putnam exam does. Being able to help organize and train a winning team has real value, but it won't play much of a role in graduate admissions.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I have found that yes, some competitions do enhance a PhD application. An example is a seminar series competition run by my university that I participated in, we had to speak about our current research (mine was the MSc at the time). I came second and it went in my favour for the subsequent PhD application.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/18 | 1,690 | 6,806 | <issue_start>username_0: The Internet is littered with information about university rankings and comparisons that it is very easy for an applicant to lose track of what exactly he wants to know. Apparently rankings which compare all departments of a university and have a single rank are not very useful from an applicant's perspective. Yet these are the most common rankings one can find. I know of the [FT rankings](http://rankings.ft.com/businessschoolrankings/global-mba-rankings-2012) which order MBA schools. It does rank B-schools in terms of research too, but clumps different branches (Accounting, Finance, Operations, etc) into one.
1. For other departments are there *reputable* and *reliable* portals where one can get to know rankings based on various criteria like published research, number of graduates, time taken for graduation, etc?
2. Are there no well-established ranking systems for academic departments? For example, these ranking systems could be similar to those in cricket or football. Such as periodic updates are made with every publication and every citation, and possibly journal reputation could also be brought into picture. In a way, would that not enhance the competitiveness in academia among similar departments?<issue_comment>username_1: I can add your list with two more well-recognized ranks:
* [topuniversities.com](http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011)
* [timeshighereducation.co.uk](http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/top-400.html)
They indeed present some divergent results, but I guess they may provide community with some clue about the "best" universities in the world.
Indeed, I agree with you that it'd be more interesting not only check out these "marketing" ranking, that considers a bunch of aspects, sometimes not transparent (!). IMHO, a good "ranking" would depend upon your subject matter, i.e., the research of interest.
You really posed a very nice question, and I'd appreciate to hear from colleagues.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer your second question, getting accurate data can be tricky. The recent kerfuffle over the NRC rankings of computer science is a good example. The methodology was flawed, the data was old, and the data was misinterpreted, and it still took many years to produce the results !
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The big difficulty with devising formal ranking systems based on numerical measures is that, outside of a handful of areas like sports, anything we can measure is at best a proxy for what we really care about. It may start off as a pretty accurate reflection, but anyone judged on this basis will quickly discover how to manipulate it.
For example, universities in the US are often judged partially by the fraction of students they accept. Of course, ambitious universities have adapted by advertising to encourage more applications, with no intention of accepting these applicants, but just to lower the acceptance rate by increasing the denominator.
Similarly, universities are also judged based on "yield," the fraction of admitted students who attend. That sounds at first like a pretty good measure of popularity, but it creates an incentive to game the system by rejecting students you think are likely to choose another university in the end, and universities do just that.
Time taken to graduation can be gamed by kicking out students who are taking too long. Employment rates can be gamed by offering ten-week temporary jobs to unemployed students, timed to coincide with the measurement of employment rate ([really!](http://abovethelaw.com/2011/05/employment-statistics-shenanigans-open-thread-which-schools-are-juking-their-stats/)). All sorts of things can be gamed.
And this is not just a theoretical problem. It occurs all the time in practice (if you are in the US, then your school is very likely doing some of these things), and some people are [extremely upset](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1990746) about it.
You might think scholarly measures based on citation counts would be less subject to this, but they are not. There are plenty of corrupt journals where editors put pressure on people to cite papers, or even use totally fraudulent methods like publishing review articles that carefully cite every paper they have recently published. People have been [caught](http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2012/04/10/emergence-of-a-citation-cartel/) seriously distorting their journals' impact factors by doing this, and I'm sure there are other, more clever editors who are getting away with it. If professional success depends on influencing a number, then people will discover ways to influence it.
In summary, there's an awful tension between transparency and resistance to fraud: if you explain how your ratings work, then people will manipulate them. Nobody has any idea how to avoid this, and the net effect is that serious scholars do not waste time trying to compile numerical rankings. For the most part, the only people who do are those who are naive, trying to make money in unscrupulous ways, or trying to promote a cause through carefully chosen rating methods. The rankings they produce are not worth paying attention to.
P.S. Polls of expert opinion are generally much better than rankings based on numerical measures, but even they have their problems. For example, the U.S. News college rankings are based partly on asking college presidents to rank other schools. Clemson University [manipulated](http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/03/rankings) the rankings by rating all competing schools as below average, no matter how good they were. I suspect they weren't the only ones to do this - the amazing thing isn't that it happened, but rather that we ever found out.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: >
> For other departments are there reputable and reliable portals where one can get to know rankings based on various criteria like published research, number of graduates, time taken for graduation, etc?
>
>
>
*YES*, in the case of computer science, for example, <http://csrankings.org/#/index?all&world> is a very reliable ranking that achieves precisely what you describe: a ranking of CS departments based solely on their conferences publication record, monthly updated, and with different parameters users can adjust by themselves.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: The QS World ranking system report rankings by many difference subject areas. It's not equivalent to "department", but it comes close:
* <https://www.topuniversities.com/subject-rankings>
The Leiden Ranking offers provides rankings based on a small number of very broad fields:
<https://www.leidenranking.com/>
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/18 | 1,381 | 5,924 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm considering a PhD and asked a professor at my university. I suggested a topic to him that he accepted. I applied and he offered me a position but I didn't accept yet.
Later he changed my project's topic to one that suits his interest. I said I would like to do the original topic that I got accepted with. Then I asked more about the project and it turns out he works in collaboration with another university. They divided the work up between themselves, but what the other university researchers is a lot closer to my personal interest than what he works on.
I asked my professor their contact details, so that I could ask them if I could work with the other university. He explicitly prohibited me from talking to them. He told me I would give bad reputation to him if I contacted them.
I am extremely confused as to why he prevents me talking to people. Even a simply inquiry email is not allowed. So I contacted the other university anyway. They told me that they would be happy to see me but they don't want to poach students from their colleagues.
I keep asking my professor if I could do my original topic with the other university that works on that exact topic that I'd like to do. But he keeps telling me that I either do his topic or I should do my PhD somewhere else.
I am utterly confused now and have no idea what is going on. Can someone please explain?<issue_comment>username_1: Your situation isn't quite clear. Are you deciding whether or not to accept a position, or have you already accepted and are trying to switch projects?
In the former case, if you're getting that kind of pushback from your advisor, then he probably is not going to be the kind of advisor you'll really want to work for in the long run. In which case, you should look for someone else to advise you (in other words, pick "somewhere else.")
On the other hand, if you're already employed by the advisor, your choices are more limited. It sounds lie you're writing from somewhere in the European system (otherwise, you'd be talking about applying to a different department, rather than another research group). The problem is exactly what the other group told you—they can't be seen as poaching a colleague's student. That's a major social *faux pas*, and would probably make their collaboration impossible to continue in the long run. Therefore, again, you probably won't get to work on the project you want, because you won't be able to move over to the other group.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are several possibilities for this behaviour.
* You're good, he knows that, and the collaboration with the other research group is more formal than you may know (maybe they are in the same funded project because it was the only way to be funded, while the two groups may be in competition). In this case, he doesn't want you to go “behind enemy lines”.
* You're not the one he was looking for, he recently discovered that. He is very close with the other group and he don't know how to tell you that you are not a good fit for his group and relatives. So instead, he changed what he said in order to make it unacceptable for you, hoping that you will leave, and that you will also not go to the other group.
* He's not reliable, he had a weird idea of what is a student.
By the way, except if you are a recognized genius, this is unlikely that the other team will accept you if they are close to your current advisor and want to stay that way.
In all three cases, only one option: run far away.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is a red flag. Find someone else to work with.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't really see why you are concerned at all! When you apply for PhD admissions, you have can always suggest who you want to work with, based on their and your research interests (you have to like them and they have to like you). I guess my question is how did you get paired up with him in first place and why?
You make it sound like you are stuck with him, but you aren't. Now if he hired you to be on his project (remember this is his project/funding), you are to work for him and do it the way that makes him look good, (he has expectations to meet too and he wants to do a good job and look good to his superiors/sponsors). If you aren't interested in his project (and it clearly looks like you are not), don't west your time or his staying on his team. Approach your program and request to be teamed up with a different adviser and provide your reasons.
I hope you understand that, in most cases in research based universities, you don't get a PhD admission offer unless at least one of the professors in the department you apply to is interested in your research topic. Now it would be unfair of you for a professor to hire you (recommend you for admission) so you can be in his team and then expect him to let you work for someone else. While he doesn't own you, he also feels that you would be an asset to his team upon your admission into the program, otherwise he could've recommended a different candidate whose interest matches his research/project.
The bottom line is however, you should get out there. Approach your department Dean's office and request to be teamed up with a different adviser and explain your reasons. Keep in mind however that in most cases at PhD level, a professor will only agree to work with you/serve as your advisor if he feels that he is familiar with your research interest and that you will be of a great asset to his team. hope that helps. Remember that your tuition weaver and other monetary benefits (monthly stipend, medical insurance, etc) you receive while you are pursuing your PhD studies is covered by the money that is allocated to his project. So it is important that have interest in the work/project he has for you and you are confident you would succeed doing it.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/18 | 933 | 3,860 | <issue_start>username_0: As an international student in the united states, I am legally allowed to work for 12 months, extendable to 29months for STEM fields, after graduating with my PhD (or masters degree for that matter) without having to change my visa/student status.
Now, I am looking for post doc opportunities in the US at several univerities but unfortunately none of the PI's respond to any queries OR application material that I send them for opportunities **advertised on their websites**.
I am seriously considering working voluntarily, without pay for my current advisor after I graduate in Dec 2012 with my PhD in Mechanical Engineering.
1. I am legally allowed voluntarily as part of the **optional practical training** period available to me after graduation.
2. I intend on doing my post doc / work pro-bono in the US because, lets face it, my home country doesn't really do much research and the pay grades are about $140 a month for fresh PhD graduates whilst I earn *several times more* as a grad student here in the US.
3. Visa regulations make it horrendously difficult to move to an other country for post doc opportunities and it is easier for me to continue in the US as I am alreadly legally here.
4. I am planning on writing a couple of proposals with my advisor so that I may [grow my own post doc](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/986/21)
5. It is an absolute pleasure working for my advisor and I wouldn't mind doing it for free for the mental stimulation that it provides (although I wouldn't want to work for free forever teeheehee `:P`)
How should I approach this situation? I am planning on requesting him to retain me on a pro-bono thingy as I genuinely like the direction my research has taken since I signed up with him 3 years ago!
Has anyone else encountered such a quandary?<issue_comment>username_1: I think it really depends on how long you plan to work without salary. If you apply for some grants in the next months, and you'll get the answers for instance in February 2012, I guess it's ok to work without salary for a couple of months, but only because you're expecting something specific. But I wouldn't recommend being in such a situation if there are no concrete expectation, because, in addition to the fact that you might need money to live, it can also be psychologically difficult, for both your advisor and yourself (maybe it's just me, but I would feel bad asking someone to do some work without any salary, even if this person is willing to).
You say that visa regulations make it difficult to move from one country to another, I don't know which country you come from, but having a PhD usually makes the process quite easier, especially coming from the US. You still have more than 6 months to find a postdoc, you would be better off with trying to get a job somewhere, meet new people, do something different and in the mean time, work with your current advisor on a proposal that would allow you to come back with some funding. An important aspect of a postdoc is to demonstrate your ability to cut the apron strings with your advisor, and to show that you can work with other people.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Why not just bring up the idea of staying in your current lab with your advisor? Without mentioning money straight off the bat?
If your advisor claims it's not possible to keep you around due to funding, then you can mention that you would be willing to do it without payment. And if you are willing to do it for free — and if you're already trained and have a good relationship — I can't imagine she/he would say no.
On the other hand, keep pursuing other options. If you work out something else, neither your advisor nor anyone else is going have hard feelings (or any sense of shock or surprise) if you leave for gainful employment.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/19 | 2,257 | 8,959 | <issue_start>username_0: My advisers are starting to use [Basecamp](http://basecamp.com/) for my project, and I like most of it so far. I am wondering, though, about the arguments for and against Basecamp.<issue_comment>username_1: Nice question. Curiously, I've been used the [dotproject](http://www.dotproject.net), it's a [FLOSS](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open_source_software) (i.e, an open-source software) alternative to msproject. It may sound weird for somebody, for a couple of reasons (isn't it a tool for huge projects? yep, and I can ask someone: isn't my thesis a huuuuge project? lol)... but, believe or not, it's been good to keep my tasks on track. Besides, as it is web-based, I've provided my advisor with access to such a tool, so that he may monitor my tasks, especially because I've been out of my country, for a while (due to an internship).
I've really thought about implementing some features to extend this tool so as to include things that are interesting, and unfortunately dotproject doesnt include.
btw, if anyone either know any tool (as a good answer for the main question) or is interested in extend the dotproject in order to come up with a tool for helping researchers to keep their tasks on trach, please tell me!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have been using a mode for [Emacs](http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) called [Org-mode](http://orgmode.org/) to track my research and do project planning. See my answer to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1159/662) for some of the other capabilities of Org-mode for research.
Org-mode has a number of features that are useful for project planning. You can set headings as multi-state TODO lists and set scheduled start times or deadlines. You can also set effort estimates for tasks and generate text based reports via tables or the agenda view, all while inside Org-mode. The [Org-mode manual](http://orgmode.org/manual/index.html) covers the customizations to these areas and there are a number of [tutorials](http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html) discussing the customization of Org-mode for a variety of tasks.
To generate graphical reports, Org-mode has an export feature for [TaskJuggler](http://www.taskjuggler.org/). TaskJuggler takes text-based inputs and generates a number of different reports including Gantt charts and resource allocations. If you do not wish to use Org-mode as the source of your planning, TaskJuggler has its own native format for the text files, highlighted in the [manual](http://www.taskjuggler.org/tj3/manual/index.html).
All the tools listed are open source and are actively being developed/maintained.
A potential downside to these tools is that they are primarily text-based. If you are a visual person who wants a GUI approach to planning/reporting, these tools are probably not suited for you. Additionally, Emacs has a fairly steep learning curve, so if you are not already using it and do not have the time to become familiar with it, other tools will probably be better suited for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: [Redmine](http://www.redmine.org) is a popular open-source project management tool. It has lots of capabilities (issue tracking, time management, gantt charts, wikis, etc); see the overview on the linked page. You download and run it on your own server.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: [Eclipse PPM](http://www.eclipseppm.com/) is a good tool - it's project/project portfolio management software. Quite a few universities and colleges use it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I highly recommend [Wunderkit](http://www.wunderkit.com/) (recently released) and [Wunderlist](http://www.6wunderkinder.com/wunderlist/) for organizing to-do list, and taking notes. I think the people at [6wunderkinder](http://www.6wunderkinder.com/) have been doing great job.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm finding it a little difficult to write my thesis while simultaneously working at an internet company, so I started using the [Kanban](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanban_%28development%29) technique. Lean/Kanban is a technique from industrial production management that was adapted and is becoming quite popular in the software development world. I use the [Trello](https://trello.com/) website to track kanban.
Kanban is very intuitive - it's just a board with many columns (for example: (work to do) - (work in progress) - (work complete), you can increase the granularity as much as you want). Each task is a card that moves around on the columns.
The purpose of the board is giving you visualization on how much work you have to do. If you worked in a car factory and you realized that cars where stacking on a queue because one of the welding machine is broken, you would notice the problem right away. But it's quite difficult to realize that there's a pile of abstract work to be done because your workflow is somehow defective. If you have a visual representation of your workflow, it's easier to detect bottlenecks and solve them.
There are a few management rules like:
* limit the number of tasks in progress and never pull new tasks until there's space available in the "in progress" column (I usually like to create very fine-grained tasks and limit it to only one in progress at a time),
* kanban is a "pulled system" instead of a "push system". You'll pull work to your desk when you finish what you're doing now (instead of waiting until someone push work onto your desk when they need you to do it). This prevents both being overwhelmed by work to do and having free time because no one give you work to do.
* organize tasks in order of priority,
* reduce waste: if you do something and abandon when it's almost done, you've wasted that time. It would be better to spend this time working on something that you would work on until completion. Or maybe you just need to push a little bit harder and bring this to completion.
* stablish "acceptance criteria". What are the criteria this piece of work must satisfy to be accepted as finished?
* stablish and measure what is "value" to you. If value is the quality of a text, then stablish levels of quality and measure the quality of your text. If value is getting things done quickly, than measure the time you take to do things.
* Stablish priority: what brings you the most value should be done first. Or rather: what have greater cost-of-delay should be done first.
Lean/Kanban works very well for software development and I needed something to organized the writing of my thesis. So I divided the thesis in chapters.sections.subsections (in the typical latex fashion) not longer than 3 paragraphs. Then I defined levels of quality (level A, the text is ok to be delivered, level B, it must undergo some review, level C, references must be checked, etc..., until level F when there's no text at all). So my tasks are: "bring subsection 2.1.3 to quality D". Now it's very easy to assign priority and
measure the amount of work done / to do. There are even some scripts to graph your progress and extract some metrics.
But what is really important is that it allowed me to focus on the small scale work to do and have clear short term landmarks, and also think on the large scale structure of the thesis and have large scale landmarks.
Some reading on Kanban and Lean for software development (I believe most of it can be seamlessly applied to academic work - most of the problems are the same):
<http://www.slideshare.net/kanbantool/kanban-in-4-easy-steps>
<http://www.kanbanway.com/lean-software-development-using-kanban>
<http://www.slideshare.net/davidpeterjoyce/pulling-value-lean-and-kanban>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: It really depends on what you are looking for in a project management tool. In my opinion, Basecamp is good in term of basic task management. And I really liked its Calendar feature. It was easy to set a milestone and adjust schedules in a click. But in the new version of BC it’s no longer an option, as calendars are now events, so I need to edit each part of the schedule manually. I personally preferred the good old version of BC, it was simple and clear. My team agreed with me and, we decided to switch to another tool.
We’ve evaluated [Trello](https://trello.com/), but it had no calendar feature at all. [Asana](https://asana.com/) didn’t quite fit our scheduling needs either. We realized that we lacked the ability to view all the projects on a monthly progress chart. Whether it’s per project or per team member, Asana couldn’t give that to us. In the end, we settled for [Wrike](http://www.wrike.com/). I like its Gantt chart even better than the Calendar we used. Thanks to it I can visualize my whole project, set dependencies between tasks, and adjust them with just drag-and-drop. And the Dashboard view is all clean and uncluttered, just like BC’s used to be. So, we are sticking with it for now.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/19 | 586 | 2,529 | <issue_start>username_0: Selecting members of one's PhD committee is an important part of a PhD student's academic development. Committee members can have considerable influence on a student's PhD program, such as determining what topics are on the student's prelims exams. However, sound advice on this process can be hard to find.
*What are some guidelines to keep in mind when selecting members of one's PhD committee?*
(This should be a generalized question useful for many different student-selected committee systems)<issue_comment>username_1: There are some general guidelines for choosing members of a PhD committee:
* **They should have some enthusiasm for the work that you do.** If they're not invested in seeing you succeed, you won't get as much utility out of that committee member as someone else who might not be as knowledgeable, but is more committed.
* **They should have the time to be on your committee.** If they're extremely busy, then it doesn't help to have them on a committee, because it will be difficult for them to attend the meetings—or it will make scheduling the meetings a nightmare.
* **They should not have conflicts with either you or your advisor.** A thesis committee is already a somewhat political body. There's no need to add extra politics to the situation by having interpersonal or professional conflicts before the committee even begins to meet!
* **Collectively, there should not be a power "imbalance."** If your advisor is a new assistant professor, don't overload the committee with a bunch of full professors holding named chairs, and *vice versa*.
When they will set preliminary exams, there's the additional qualification of:
* The committee members should be familiar enough with your area that they know what it might make sense to test you on, but not *so* familiar with your work that they turn it into a "gotcha" game.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: username_1's post is very good, and just to add another few:
* How difficult of a committee member are they? Some people will ask you to do far more work than others, and they typically have a reputation as such. It's worth trying to find that out and saving yourself the headache.
* Many universities allow one or two committee members from outside the university. If there is a particular subject matter expert you would like to consult, feel free to ask them to serve on your committee... it can help you build a relationship with them and get their feedback on your research.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/19 | 555 | 2,375 | <issue_start>username_0: I am finishing a paper which was created thanks to my inspiration of <NAME>'s work on [psychological developement](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erikson%27s_stages_of_psychosocial_development). The paper is, however, in the field of thermodynamics and complexity-science. I, therefore, feel grateful that such a great theory was created many years ago, and now is capable to push exact sciences step forward. I named two terms following Erikson's theory. I would like to note this somewhere, or state in general that I was inspired by the theory.
Do you think that it is OK to do this? Maybe I should hold back for some time, I can always state the "thank you" in the subsequent papers?<issue_comment>username_1: I would reserve the acknowledgments section for people or organizations that directly contributed to the paper. For example, if you talked with Erikson while he was still alive and he offered advice or suggestions, then it would be appropriate to thank him in the acknowledgments. If you were just inspired by his papers, then it is better to discuss that elsewhere in the paper. For example, you could note in the introduction that your approach is inspired by Erikson's work on psychological development, or you could mention this background when you define the terms based on his theory. But if you thank him in the acknowledgments section, then people will assume there was a more personal connection unless you clearly specify otherwise ("Although I was never lucky enough to discuss this work with him in person, I owe <NAME> a great debt for...").
The main thing you should not do when thanking a deceased person is to attribute opinions to them, because they are not around to contradict you. For example, you should not thank them in a way that suggests they supported your work, even if it's true, unless you have some documented proof. For example, it's awkward to write "I am deeply grateful to <NAME> for his steadfast belief in my theory."
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Instead of acknowledging him, you can dedicate the paper to him. I fully agree with @anonymous mathematician that acknowledgment has another purpose. Dedicating to a paper to a famous professor for her/his birthday, however, is not that uncommon and in spirit, I feel it closer to your intentions.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/19 | 915 | 3,399 | <issue_start>username_0: I know it's rather difficult to establish a ranking of publications, especially because the ones in charge of establishing values for venues might be biased by their field, and several other aspects. However, I know some well-accepted (at least locally) ranking, that consider all fields under research, e.g. [Brazilian Qualis](http://qualis.capes.gov.br/webqualis/) - in portuguese - that includes both confs and journals, and [Australian ERA](http://www.arc.gov.au/era/default.htm) - this latter has served as baseline for some class A conferences in Computer Science (my research field), in some countries other than Australia.
Hence, I wonder about the existence of another "global ranking", that has been applied overseas, thus including at least the most prominent events and journals in every field. For journals, it's a little bit easier to measure its importance, by looking at their Impact Factor values, but for conferences it's a little bit tough. To the best of my knowledge, I don't know a largely-applied means of measuring the impact of a conf.
I'd like to hear from you. Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: In Computer Science, CiteSeerX used to provide a Venue Impact Factor, that included journals and conferences, but it seems they've stopped doing it. As indicated by username_2, Microsoft academic Research is some kind of global ranking, and JeffE also mentions google.scholar.
That being said, a global ranking, across sub-fields, is not necessarily meaningful. For instance, if one does not work on programming languages, then it's unlikely to submit a paper at POPL (the first venue according to CiteseerX). Hence, I'd say that field-specific rankings matter more, for instance in security: <http://faculty.cs.tamu.edu/guofei/sec_conf_stat.htm> or <https://personal.cis.strath.ac.uk/changyu.dong/ranking.html>.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is not perfect (I have found many conference from my field not listed under the right subfield) nor exhaustive, but I have often found [Microsoft academic Research](http://academic.research.microsoft.com/) useful.
Furthermore it has the great advantage to give ranking for both journal and conference and to cover many domains (Agriculture Science, Arts & Humanities, Biology, Chemistry, Computer Science, Economics & Business, Engineering, Environmental Sciences, Geosciences, Material Science, Mathematics, Medicine, Physics, Social Science)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The following national rankings were used as a baseline in the construction of the [Finnish ranking](http://www.tsv.fi/julkaisufoorumi/haku.php?lang=en). Hence they are "global" in the sense that they have been at least somewhat useful abroad:
* Norwegian ranking (general): <http://dbh.nsd.uib.no/kanaler/?search=advanced>
* Danish ranking (general): <http://fivu.dk/forskning-og-innovation/statistik-og-analyser/den-bibliometriske-forskningsindikator>
* Australian ranking (general): <http://www.arc.gov.au/era/era_2012/era_journal_list.htm>
* European ranking (humanities): <http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/erih-european-reference-index-for-the-humanities.html>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It varies by discipline. In Medicine, conferences are not as important as journal articles.
In Computer science, [some] conferences are very prestigious
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/19 | 1,753 | 6,749 | <issue_start>username_0: I would like to have a professional academic webpage, and for different reasons, I don't want to use the website of my current workplace (mostly because due to some external factors, it's not currently possible where I work, but also because I consider changing affiliation in the future, and I'd like to avoid moving my webpage).
A possible solution I'm considering would be to rent a server somewhere, and to manage it myself, but I was wondering if it existed some dedicated solutions for academics, ideally coming for free (after all, I can archive my papers on arXiv for free, I have a free academic licence for Bitbucket, I use Dropbox with the free version, I can also use Mendeley and academia.edu for free, I currently have a free wordpress.com blog), with the constraint that I'd like to be able to write my own scripts (for instance to publish my personal list of publications [Tool to manage and/or make available a list of my publications on the web?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/719/102) , or to manage a list of conferences I'm interested in).<issue_comment>username_1: One possibility is [Wikidot](http://www.wikidot.com/); its main version is free plus has some additional features for researchers and teachers.
Another one is [WordPress.com](http://wordpress.com/), which you already have mentioned. If you have a server, [WordPress.org](http://wordpress.org/) may be even a better option (as it is much more adjustable).
However, for papers/conferences/etc it may be better to use widget from a dedicated server (or add by hand).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: What about [google sites](https://sites.google.com)? I have a "website" on it. I don't quite remember the amount of data you can have on it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's not academic specific, but [Amazon.com](http://amazon.com) has instructions for setting up a free web server using their free Micro EC2 instance type. As specific academic websites are fairly low traffic, generally speaking, that might be an option that gives you the scripting flexibility you're hoping for.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You could look into a cloud application platform like [Heroku](http://www.heroku.com/).
Essentially, you can deploy web applications for free (with or without a custom domain name). You only pay if you need more power or more database storage. They also have addons, some free and some paid. You don't manage the details of the server, you only worry about your application.
For example, you can instantly deploy a rails app with a git push command. If you need to run a periodic tasks, you can enable a cron addon: free for a daily task or a fee for a more frequent task.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I recently created a website with Google Sites (https://sites.google.com/site/hadanylab/) and I think it was a good experience and a nice result. Easy to use, editing is the same as in Google Docs which is nice. Customization can be a pain, but that is expected. You can get around some of the difficulties using widgets, though.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: To my knowledge, **Google Sites** with a custom domain is the best solution here. Google sites gives 100MB space with unlimited bandwidth. Also, you can keep your pre-prints on Google docs and make them public. Additionally, you can use some widget like writing a blog.
Edit: Link to my website removed as it's no longer available.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Both [bitbucket](https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/BITBUCKET/Publishing+a+Website+on+bitbucket) and [github](https://github.com/blog/272-github-pages) allow you to publish a static website, which is handled under the same version control policies as everything else that you publish there.
You get no php/database support, but for academic web sites a static website generator such as [Jekyll](http://jekyllrb.com/), which they both use, is more than enough.
Note added after reading @RebeccaJ.Stones [comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1200/free-web-hosting-for-academics/3414#comment148880_3404) to another answer: github is currently blocked in China, while bitbucket [is not](http://viewdns.info/chinesefirewall/?domain=bitbucket.org), so you may want to go for the latter, to make sure that everyone can access your website.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: I personally use [altervista.org](http://en.altervista.org/) and I am satisfied with it. They give me 500MB space and 10Gb bandwidth for free, an address of the form `yourname.altervista.org`, run php 4 and 5 and a database service (with low performance in the free version), and allow a custom `.htaccess`. They offer paid upgrades and the option of putting banners for a revenue, but you can say no without any disadvantage.
They allow file upload only via (unencrypted) ftp, but you can automate that part easily.
It's not academics-specific, but as far as I can see neither is any other answer given up to now.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_8: As you are looking for free online services, you should seek a free web hosting service as stated in this answer [[1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/3413/15723) and [2](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/3416/15723)] by which you can make your own website or you can make use of separate free services and make a free webpage to list all your accounts there.
Recently, I have visited [about.me](https://about.me) website and I really liked the domain, it's interface and it's services.
This is my suggestion:
1. **Files Hosting:** host your files on a [dropbox](http://dropbox.com), [google drive](http://drive.google.com) or any other free hosting service;
2. **Publications List:** list your publications in a [google scholar](http://scholar.google.com) account or [academia.edu](http://academia.edu);
3. **Free domain and URL:** build your page on [about.me](https://about.me) website;
4. **Weblog:** If you like to write something; make a [wordpress.com](http://wordpress.com) or [blogger](http://blogger.com) weblog;
5. **Social Media:** You may have some [facebook](http://facebook.com) or [twitter](http://twitter.com) accounts too;
---
**HOW TO MAKE YOUR WEBSITE?**
Present a short biography and list of those links above in a single [about.me](https://about.me) webpage. You can have this website anywhere and anytime; even if you change your affiliation, simply change your info on your about.me website.
Also, in your institute's page, you can easily put your [about.me](https://about.me) link and by opening it, the user will have access to you publications, files you want to share with, social media sites, personal weblog, etc.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/20 | 2,086 | 8,325 | <issue_start>username_0: ### General background
Some time ago, I was reading [a blog post, where there was some discussion about how many people read journal articles](http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2010/06/23/write-only-articles/).
I think that such an estimate is important when trying to assess the impact of research on society.
However, whereas internet sites readily track usage. Such information seems a little more difficult to come by when it comes to readership for a particular journal article.
### Initial Ideas
* **Articles vary**: Obviously journal articles vary in many ways and just as with citation counts, readership is likely to be highly skewed, perhaps something like a power function. In addition to academic impact, presumably articles that are available for free on the internet are read more.
* **Time since publication**: The number of reads increases over time, but the rate of readership presumably varies over time (perhaps a spike on initial release, and then gradual decline as relevance dissipates).
* **Definitions of reading vary**: Read counts would also increase or decrease based on how reading is defined. At the low end is a glance at an abstract. At the high end is carefully reading the entire article. I'd be happy with a working definition that involved reading at least two pages.
### Initial Data
* [PlosOne article statistics](http://www.plosone.org/static/journalStatistics.action#PLoSONE): As a very rough guide, it suggests that mean views per article is around 800 per year.
* [Journal of Vision](http://www.journalofvision.org/content/9/4/i?related-urls=yes&legid=jov;9/4/i): this article reports some download statistics: "In the most recent accounting in July, 2008, the top five articles were each downloaded between 1,993 and 3,478 times."
* Some journals list subscription counts
### Initial Guess
I find it useful to have a ball park estimate of these things.
My own initial guess, based on minimal data, is that readership is between 50 and 1000 times the citation count for the article. Linking the estimate to citation count makes it easier to estimate for a given article and should incorporate effects like time and journal prestige.
### Question
* What is a good estimate of how many people read a given journal article?
* What data and sources of information justify this estimate?
* Is there any established literature that can inform such an estimate?<issue_comment>username_1: Sounds like a Fermi Problem :)
A question I asked myself recently, based on the many cases of plagiarism by top-politicians in Germany in humanities, was, are in humanities more articles/texts published than scholars can actually read completly. The amount of copied text in single phd thesis showed by plagiarism-detection communities in Germany like *Vroniplag* or *Guttenplag* is shocking to me. Often 50% of text is not marked correctly as citation. Even the supervisors at the local universities look like they never read some of these thesis completly. I really hope this is not representative, but fear it might be the tip of the iceberg in humanities (in Germany).
Personally, coming and working in a STEM field, I did a very specialized thesis, there are often less than a dozen groups worldwide working on such a narrow-specialized topic (matter of scientific competition/finding a niche, time, expertise and lab hardware in such fields). **So there will be articles in peer-reviewed journals that are not really interesting to more than 20-50 researcher and probably a similar number of industry-researchers worldwide in STEM** (competition between companies and research groups being not that different due to economic contraints). Without modern search engines, most non-scholars/private men would have a hard time to find such articles. This is another point in your estimation. The reader count for nature/sciene vs. very specialized journals varies a lot, I don't think any average number really helps you a lot or is that interesting. If you know your specialized field, you should notice pretty fast studying some journals, how many scholars have really a interest in that field.
Your PlosOne link is interesting. I can back this up a bit to give you at least a rough magnitude of order, what the reader count of top, specialized, ... journals is. I think it's quite normal, to read articles not completely (even if you cite them), but I take a close look on articles I downloaded, often due to the fact that I use many keywords and google operators to really filter out the stuff I'm looking for. This is something that varies also a lot between different scholars/students. I'm often shocked how students make use of search engines, if it is laziness or ignorance of search operators. This can save you so much reading time. **Therefore, I think the extrapolated reader count based on citation factor might be more representative and reliable than using site views/downloads** due to scholars, private people, laymen often downloading articles with information they didn't look for because of bad search engine use. Growing redundancy/plagiarism is a further factor here.
Some possible heuristics:
* comparison of published aricles per month and web site/interface visitors per month on download platforms like PlosOne, arxiv, nature.
arxiv has around [6000 published articels per month](http://arxiv.org/show_monthly_submissions), unique visits [100000](http://siteanalytics.compete.com/arxiv.org/), [12,4 million downloads by academic institutions, 50 million overall](http://arxiv.org/help/support/2011_usage) vs. 12x6000 articles 2011 means **downloads/view of abstract of around 170 (I used 12,4 million here)**, of course, that doesnt count articles not published in that year, **so the average read count of a single arxiv article is probably lower than 170 and more touching the 20-50 mark I explained above. But here you have IMO a reasonable and quite objective minimum and maximum limit for a scientific article other scholars are really interested in, 50-170**
nature has [900000](http://siteanalytics.compete.com/nature.com/) unique visits per month, around [200](http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=21206&tip=sid&clean=0) articles per month, so you see why having an article published in nature is probably more worth than 10 articles on arxiv, PlosOne or many other specialized journals in a distinct branch, even if they are peer reviewed ;)
* looking up bibliographies of a some phd thesis in your field at your local university, the number of cited articles is in STEM often in the range of 50-200 (You see even here it varies a lot what a single phd student will/has to read). Of course you do not cite all articles you read, but the factor shouldn't be higher than 2 between (or your search engine use is imho suboptimal) cited and read articles. Considering the phd student will publish 3-5 (in STEM reasonable number or 1 nature article :) ) articles during his phd work and multiplying 3-5\*20-50 (average read count by institutional scholars) you also get the number of articles in a phd thesis bibliography of 50-200. Pure Chance?! Looks like a strange calculation, but there is a link between how much article input a average scholar needs and how much output he creates (thats why I multiply both values) and it strengthens my experience/analysis above that 10-100 readers is a reasonable magnitude of order for people being really interested in an single average article. To me it doesn't look like pure chance, but that's the main problem with Fermi questions and answers :)
PS: notice this analysis is focused on STEM, I believe the average read count is much lower in humanities and side-effects like different languages and plagiarism seem to play a bigger role to make a really objective guesstimate
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: [Smithsonian.com](http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/half-academic-studies-are-never-read-more-three-people-180950222/?no-ist) recently noted that there are about 1.8 million scholarly articles and scientific papers published each year in 28,000 journals. About half of these are not read by anyone other than the author, a journal editor, and a couple of reviewers. They report that 90 percent are never cited by other papers.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/20 | 1,571 | 6,768 | <issue_start>username_0: I have recently applied to two PhD programs (in Europe) under professors working in the area of Sound and Music Computing (SMC). Both programs are very well regarded in this area.
SMC covers topics such as:
* Music information retrieval
* Computational musicology
* Algorithmic composition / performance
* Sentiment and expression modelling in music
* Computational approaches to music cognition
* Audio signal processing
This is not a complete list. I find the field very interesting.
However, would the industry want to hire someone with a PhD in SMC? Let's say Google (just as an example), which is known to hire many PhDs. Would they be interested in someone with a PhD in SMC, or would they restrict themselves to machine learning / web / search PhDs? And yes... I'm sure that Yamaha would love to hire an SMC PhD, but would I be restricting my options to only a small subset of the industry?
What about academia? How would they look upon an applicant to the assistant professor position who has a PhD in this area? Would they simply reject him saying "Sorry, but we don't do research in your area...", since it is true that **most** CS departments don't do active research in SMC? Again, would I be restricting my options to only a small subset of universities?
Secondly, how easy / hard is it to switch fields AFTER doing a PhD in it? I may like SMC enough to work on it for 5 years (and get a PhD) but I MAY not want to work on it for a lifetime. In industry or academia, could I switch to something else when (and if) I want to?
One researcher told me that I should only consider pursuing my interest in SMC **after** I have already established myself in some other, more fundamental, area of CS, like algorithms or AI. Do you agree?
This thread should be useful to anyone considering a PhD in a specialized or maybe even an obscure area.<issue_comment>username_1: SMC sounds like a very interesting but somewhat narrow specialization. Since it's not likely that an expert will appear to answer this question, here are some comments:
One key question regarding career paths is how bad you would feel if they fell through. For example, suppose you got a Ph.D. in SMC, tried and failed to get an academic job in this area, and ended up getting a job in industry that was relevant but didn't really require the full Ph.D. Would you regret having started on this path, or would you be happy to have had a chance to study something exciting and to have developed expertise that might still serve you well in the future? If you would regret it, then you need to think very carefully about the job market, but if your personality could handle this situation, then this path could be a wise choice.
The big danger with unusual fields is that few people will be specifically looking to hire in this area. You may get lucky and find someone who is, but you may need to create your own opportunities. If you have an outgoing personality and are good at networking and making connections, then there will be less risk.
In academia, you'll run into two difficulties. One is that no CS program will *need* to have this area represented, so you'll have to make a stronger case for why you would be a great hire. The other problem is that if a school is open to SMC, then they may already have someone in this area, and it's a narrow enough field that making multiple hires could be a very tough sell. So you would be looking for the schools that are interested, but not so interested that they have already hired someone. Of course, it's far from impossible, but some other branches of CS may be a little easier.
As for switching areas, it can certainly be done. You may run into a little resistance, depending on what you were originally hired to do. (This could be a serious issue in industry, and even in academia your colleagues may be counting on you to teach the introductory course in your old field.)
If you are equally interested in and talented at algorithms and SMC, then it's probably a little safer to start with algorithms. However, if only one of them will make you happy and inspire you to do your best work, then that one would be the better choice.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Every PhD is necessarily specialized, but along the way you must obtain different depths of knowledge from different fields.
So rather than selling yourself as someone researching Sound and Music Computing, you should mold yourself as someone doing, for example, Machine Learning with a focus on Sound and Music applications. This way, when you have finished your PhD doing what you love, you will still have skills that some department will be willing to hire you for. If you know machine learning, then you'll be able to teach machine learning courses. You'll be able to adapt that knowledge to solve other problems that may have similarities at some abstract level to Sound and Music, perhaps because they involve temporal streams of almost repeating data points.
When publishing, you will need to try to publish in top quality, general conferences or journals, rather than publishing everything in smaller, Sound and Music specific events. Naturally, the small events may provide you with good feedback and exposure within your community, but the larger events are what count when people are looking at your CV.
I think that it is very important to study what you find interesting, but do not overspecialized yourself into a tiny niche.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: SMC is not a narrow field. You listed some topics, but in reality this area can cover anything from speech recognition (machine learning, signal processing, etc) to art installation design, covering architecture, musical instruments, computer architecture, virtual reality and hearing aid design along the way.
Have a clear idea of both what interests you, and what career path you might want before you apply though. I took my master's in this field in an attempt to find a new career path. It opened so many doors that I am now frozen trying to decide which way to go.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I think it would be fine. How would it be that much different from someone in EE, physics, or CS who does a general degree in their topic and then a project on acoustics? Even then, they would not be restricted to acoustic jobs but could do a lot of things in signal processing, spectral analysis, sonar, speech processing, NSA crap, even geophysics perhaps, later.
Yeah, you don't get a general grad degree but in some ways get even more breadth (acoustics plus computing). It sounds like a really cool program. Get to do all that cool acoustics and never have to do graduate physics E&M with teh Jackson.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/21 | 757 | 3,311 | <issue_start>username_0: OpenCourseWare has become more and more popular over the years, and quite a good number of universities make their lessons available in the form of online videos. However, compared to the total number of universities found in the US or rest of the world, the offerings are quite small. It seems to me that OpenCourseWare is a great way for schools to draw attention to themselves, so why is the percentage of schools offering OCW courses small?<issue_comment>username_1: Making an OpenCourseWare course isn't as simple as getting a team of kids with videocameras and uploading the course onto YouTube. There is a surprisingly high standard that the Professor and the University attempts to meet when they prepare a course to be deposited onto OpenCourseWare.
Stanford had built entire classrooms for the purpose of sharing online classes. Many of them have 3-4 cameras controlled by two operators while another is entirely responsible for the sound. Classes that require a balance between boardwork, slides, and discussion require a very well-trained team of videographers to recognize what they are supposed to be looking at without breaking the rhythm of the course and capturing the intent of the lecturer.
Ask any Professor how prepared their lectures are. Despite how absent-minded most professors seem, there is a large amount of practice and slidology behind each lecture. OCW adds a whole other layer to preparation since the course actually has to run on schedule and conclude with the course completed. The materials used require additional thought since OCW is limited to only a single camera. Look at some of Yale's early OTC courses; the professor will make references to a figure and the camera will be focused on his gestures rather than the actual information that they are trying to portray.
Lastly online courses are extremely expensive and don't truly make the return on investment as one would imagine. For instance, Utah State was forced to [end their OpenCourseWare initiative](http://chronicle.com/article/Free-Online-Courses-at-a-V/48777/).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Along with @username_1's excellent answer, I've heard a few other reasons not to post certain types of courses online:
* The notion of "supporting" the course. If you put your course online, are you obligated to answer questions, provide student support, etc.? I'm not talking about a contractual obligation as much as "If I put my lecture up there, how do *I* feel about 'Good luck with this material, you're on your own'?
* Based on your answer to the above, you may have to actually redesign your course so it can "stand alone" as a series of videos, rather than how you prefer to teach face-to-face.
* Some professors who run heavily student-interaction based classes are reluctant to post those lectures, because they want their students to be free to ask questions freely, make mistakes, etc. without those errors being archived on the internet for all time.
But I think the technical one is the biggest hurdle. OpenCourseWare needs to actually have production values in order to be worthwhile, as anyone whose remotely participated in a course where the lecture is in a room with poor acoustics and a single camera in the back will tell you.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/04/21 | 1,113 | 4,884 | <issue_start>username_0: I've been accepted to a top 20 Computer Science department with a RA, TA and fellowship. I decided to defer my admissions a year due to unforeseen circumstances. I was informed the school does not allow deferment, and my adviser told me to simply reapply next year. If I was accepted to the university this academic year, should I be able to get accepted next Fall? My application will be the exact same as it was this year including my recommendation letters, personal statement, and research experience.<issue_comment>username_1: If you have the time and financial resources to apply, there's no reason *not* to apply to schools that you think you have a chance to be admitted to. One thing that you could do is to see if you can get an appointment to talk with a graduate admissions officer at one of the departments you're interested in; you'll find out pretty quickly what the officer thinks of your admission chances. (It was how I learned not to worry about my credentials when I applied way back when.) In addition, the initiative may be appreciated by the officer, which may help your chances of admissions in the long run.
As for deferment policies, those are strictly school- and department-dependent. I would hope that you would be considered equally both years, but the truth is that you are usually compared to other applicants *in the year that you apply*. Therefore, a weaker application next year will not help. (Although if your grades in the major are strong, weaknesses outside the major won't hurt you so much.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll address the chances of being admitted again next year at a school that accepted you this year. Certainly they aren't 100%, or even 95%, since if they were that high, then the department would save itself the trouble and simply allow deferrals. As Aeismail points out, it also depends on the strength of the applicant pool, and that can fluctuate from year to year. For example, in a bad economy, or if the department hires a star faculty member, it can become harder to get admitted.
Department admissions procedures vary greatly. In some departments, having strong support from a single faculty member may be enough to guarantee admission. That is not true in my department, and I'd estimate that the average chances of being admitted again in this department are about 75%. (Don't take this figure too seriously, but it's a better estimate than 50% or 100%. It's based on experience and thought experiments rather than data.)
Roughly, the top 25% of the class is admitted quickly and easily, with little debate. The next 25% involves more discussion, but the answers are probably pretty consistent, and the main issue is ranking for things like fellowships. It's the bottom half that involves increasing amounts of randomness. The number of plausible acceptances - people where nobody would think it strange if they were admitted - is substantially larger than the number we will actually accept. Near the dividing line, there are a lot of people whose applications are really pretty comparable. We arrange them in order, after a lot of discussion, and draw lines for admission and waiting list. The order is not completely random, of course; the stronger your application is, the higher you are likely to be ranked. But there's a lot of arbitrariness to it, since it's a matter of small distinctions. The trickiest cases are the applicants who have notable strengths and weaknesses, and their positions depend sensitively on who is on the committee: getting a high ranking depends on having some committee member who strongly supports your case, and nobody who is strongly opposed. (Admissions committee are often risk averse, so opposition counts more than support.)
Overall, I'd guess that as many as half of the people in the bottom half of the list might have been replaced with someone else if another committee had examined the applications from scratch. That would correspond to a 75% overlap between the decisions.
Of course, this figure is pretty much meaningless for individuals. If you are a star, then you will definitely be accepted again. If you were the most controversial and lowest-ranked person last year, then your chances of being lucky next year as well are not good. The truth is most likely to be in between.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would assume that your chances to be readmitted are not high: the graduate committees would probably remember that you did not come last year, and will not want to risk another deferral. It is not like a faculty position re-application in which the recruiting committee has more time to think through process, and would have time to evaluate the chances that an applicant that deferred in the past would come this year. In graduate school admissions, I believe decisions are made quite fast.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/22 | 759 | 3,190 | <issue_start>username_0: Many times in universities, people don't dedicate much time to build friendly relationships with colleagues.
Unfortunately, this happens both in the tenured positions and in non-tenured positions, with many bad consequences (such as for examples, many researchers actually don't know what other colleagues are researching on...).
I've always been thinking that building strong friend relationships with colleagues can be very useful and powerful, for careers but most of all to create a more serene work environment.
I think that a good way to create friendly relationships with colleagues is organizing **extra-work activities**, such as dinners, soccer matches, etc.
Last week some of my PhD student colleagues organized a pizza dinner between colleagues. All my department (~150) PhD students were invited, but in the end we were just 9! :-(
What d'you do to build strong friend relationships with colleagues?
Could you tell some success stories?
Could you give some good advices?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, a lot of academics tend to shy away from things like a pizza party. I would suggest thinking about things that connect common interests. For example, consider starting a book club on some relatively broad topic of interest, or a group where folks read and comment on each other's work. These kind of things can be really valuable of they ring together folks from different specalizations. It is always good to get a different perspective.
As another example, think about setting up a brown bag lecture series. These can be great ways to get folks out of their offices and talking.
Beyond this, I would generaly suggest not trying to set up events that have 150 people invited. Think smaller and more targeted.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Eat lunch with people.**
While many researcher don't have very flexible schedules, they do occasionally eat. However, creating a structured lunch environment where there is a daily meeting location at a consistent time with a knowledge that anyone can drop by without feeling excluded, closeted academics might feel like they might have to make time to grab some lunch.
Then there are the occasional department happy hours.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In our department, the assistant professors go out for drinks once a month (a fixed day of the week and a fixed week of the month). That tends to work out quite well: we can let off steam, compare notes on our students (and what senior faculty dish out in the name of advice :)), and generally get a nice group. I've had a few collaborations start because of this as well.
The general faculty also do a drinks night occasionally, but not as regularly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Be a leader!
Make a research group,
Know what you want to do and divide the works,
Do not waste your time on finding friends,
Be a person whose character is interesting for other people,
Be yourself, be the guy who has big dreams,
Then you have a team with people who want to have a role in your work.
Never try to be the person who follows the others,
Be the person who is followed by others.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/22 | 539 | 2,039 | <issue_start>username_0: >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [How to make a presentation that includes math symbols?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/301/how-to-make-a-presentation-that-includes-math-symbols)
>
>
>
I have been using TeX4PPT for PowerPoint under Windows for a few years to include matematical formulas in PP presentations. Recently, I got a Mac notebook and I would like to use my PP presentations both under Windows as well as under Mac OS X. However, I cannot find a program that would allow me to use LaTeX generating formulas in PP under both operating systems (so I could use my presentations freely on both OS). Any ideas?<issue_comment>username_1: On Mac Os only, you can use [Keynote](http://www.apple.com/iwork/keynote/) and [Latexit](http://pierre.chachatelier.fr/latexit/latexit-home.php), as explained in this question: [How to make a presentation that includes math symbols?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/301/102) I've been using this technique recently, and it's very nice!
However, as far as I know, you cannot show Keynote presentation on Windows. A possible solution could be to export them as PPT, but I've just tried, and it's not very nice, especially for the included formulas. You can also export them as PDF, in which case it's graphically nice, but you lose any animated transition.
Another solution could be to use Latexit to generate PDF, and to include the PDF directly in Powerpoint. If you use a white background, that can do the trick, since formulas will be exported with a white background (but maybe it's possible to set it up, I've never tried with Powerpoint to be honest, so maybe you can import SVG format directly in Powerpoint).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Another possible solution is to work directly in tex (that is, via [Beamer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beamer_%28LaTeX%29)) and get a cross-platform presentations. Although, if you want to do presentation animations and sophisticated tricks, this is inferior to PPT/Keynote.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/22 | 1,945 | 8,715 | <issue_start>username_0: We all know that usually when applying for a post phd academic position students need at least three recommendation letters. But what can we do if we have only worked with our advisor and we have no other close professors in the department to ask. This refers to the case when the student took classes, had a little teaching experience, but never got to the point to know some professor well, or collaborate with researchers from another place.
Some sub-questions:
1) how well does the writer need to know the student to write a decent recommendation?
2) how research recommendations are looked at when applying for purely teaching job?
3) how non-research recommendations are looked at when applying for research job?
4) what else can we do in a short period of time to acquire those recommendations?
5) is there a way to avoid submitting recommendations, at least in the first stage of the application process?<issue_comment>username_1: You could ask members of your doctoral committee to write you a letter of recommendation each. They would probably need some details about the job and what it entails. They would also want to see your transcripts and a copy of your curriculum vitae but that shouldn't be a biggy!
Research related recommendation letters are obviously great if you are applying for a research job. Either way, you could ask your *advisor* to write you a letter that carries a good balance of *research aptitude* and general *work skills*.
In my experience, it is difficult to get letters of recommendation on short notice. They could take a couple weeks to a month or so.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are applying for a position that involves teaching, you should have one or more letters addressing your teaching. If you were the TA for the course, they should come for the lead or recitation instructor. If you were the lead instructor, it should be whoever supervised you, possibly an administrator. If you apply for a teaching position without any such letters, they will infer you really want a research position and are only applying to them as a fallback position, which does not make you an attractive candidate. (I've been on both sides.)
I second the recommendation to solicit letters from members of your doctoral committee, as well as anyone with whom you have co-authored a paper, done an internship with, particularly impressed while taking their class, etc.
If you have done impressive service, you can get a letter from someone about that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You need to strategize with your advisor, or a trusted mentor, about this. You need recommenders who have a high opinion of your work, are willing to put in the time to write a good letter, and know how to do so (which rules out more people than you might think). Ideally, you need advice from someone who knows what sorts of letters different people write and can help you choose who might be most appropriate.
What I recommend for my students is:
1. A letter from me, which will discuss in detail what they have done, why it's important, what the student's key contributions were, what the future might hold, etc. I'll also sit in on a class the student teaches and talk with them about teaching, so I can put in a reasonably well-informed paragraph about that, but the focus of the letter will be research. (I'll have a different version of this letter, which emphasizes teaching more, to be sent to highly teaching-oriented jobs.)
2. A teaching letter from someone in the department who is well known for excellent teaching and can evaluate the quality of their teaching.
3. A research letter from another faculty member in the department. This will be from someone the student has met with at least a couple of times each semester for the last year or two, if not more often, so they will be in an excellent position to write a serious letter.
4. A research letter from someone at another university, typically someone I know who has interacted with the student at conferences, seen the student give at least one talk, and read at least one paper by the student. This proves that the student is developing a reputation outside their university, and it supplies a letter from someone who has less of a vested interest in seeing the student succeed.
Of course, it's hard to set up (3) and (4) on short notice. It's often helpful if your advisor asks someone. I can say "You remember my excellent student Alice, the one who wrote the paper on X? She's graduating this year, and I think she's going to do very well on the job market, but she still needs one more recommendation, and we're hoping for one from another university. Could you help?" By contrast, there's nothing a student can write that will be as effective. (From a student's perspective, the letter is a favor to the student, but faculty sometimes think of it as a favor to the advisor.)
The biggest problem is if your advisor can't or won't help with this. Then you'll have to pick the most supportive people you know and ask them yourself. It's helpful to offer to meet with them to tell them about your work, to make sure they are fully up to date. You should send them copies of all your application materials. It's also helpful if you supply additional background and commentary, to help give them more of a feeling for your work and its context. This makes it easier to write the letter, by supplying interesting ideas and facts the letter writer can mention. (That's the lazy approach to writing a letter, but if someone is going to be lazy, you want to make it as easy as possible for them.) Make sure everyone writing a research letter actually plans to discuss your research. It can really hurt your application if a letter just says "Bob took my advanced phrenology class and received an A. I was particularly impressed with his insightful questions regarding retrophrenology, and I became convinced that this bright young man has an extraordinary future in pseudoscience. I haven't read any of his papers, but his advisor assures me that they are wonderful, so Bob has my strongest recommendation." When you get your Ph.D., you should be judged based on your research (and teaching), not your performance in classes.
You should request letters at least one month before the deadline. It doesn't really take a month to write a letter, but it can take a number of hours (looking at papers and application materials, thinking, and then writing). Any given week may be very busy - for example, someone may be travelling or facing a major deadline - and faculty members often have to write dozens of letters, so if you do not ask far enough in advance, then there may simply not be enough time for your letter. If you need a letter very quickly, then you are asking for a huge favor, and the letter probably won't be as long or compelling as it might have been otherwise.
As for some of your sub-questions: The writer does not need to know the student well, but must know something about the student's work (for example, from papers or talks). For most academic jobs in the fields I know about, there is no way to avoid submitting recommendations with the initial application.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Really, you should start thinking about who you'll ask to write letters a couple of years before you ask for them. Then you'll have time to develop relationships with your letter writers. If you'd like to get a letter of recommendation from someone (particularly at your university), but haven't worked with them, try to start a collaboration. For faculty other than your adviser, your "researchy" interaction with them will often start with a reading course (or independent study).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In some areas of computer science, summer internships at corporate research labs (Microsoft Research, IBM research, and AT&T research mostly) have become an important part of the PhD process. The main benefit of doing an internship or two is to broaden the student's set of collaborators. This is helpful for them to get exposed to new areas of research that will eventually form a part of their thesis, but it is also an excellent source of recommendation letters. A researcher who supervised a student for a summer, and with whom he wrote a paper (or two, or three!) is in an excellent position to write a strong letter.
Of course, your thesis committee is another good place to look. Many times you will need 4 people on your committee (Your advisor, two others from your department, and sometimes an external researcher). With luck, at least 3 of these people will know your work well enough to write for you.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/22 | 1,640 | 6,171 | <issue_start>username_0: from [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_engineering):
>
> **Software engineering** (SE) is the application of a systematic, disciplined,
> quantifiable approach to the development, operation, and maintenance
> of software, and the study of these approaches.
>
>
>
I was wondering if there is something similar for research, something that we could call **Research engineering**. I imagine it to be a research field on its own, with students "researching on how to do research". I believe software development has benefited a lot from research in SE. Maybe research could also benefit from Research engineering.
The questions are:
* is there some institute or some university department in the world where they work on Research Engineering?
* in which faculty you would position such department/institute?
*Edited*: After getting a couple of good answers, I am still not completely satisfied, so I would like to clarify my question. What I am really interested in is indeed a "software engineering" approach. I am not interested in philosophical or sociological research. In fact, the question I had originally in mind was whether it's possible or not to apply actual software development methodologies to research. In more concrete terms, I am wondering whether anyone has studied the application in research of models similar to the waterfall, or the spiral model, or things like extreme programming, [Scrum](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrum_%28development%29), etc... (Note: these are just examples, please don't comment to each of them one by one).<issue_comment>username_1: I've never heard of a field dedicated to the study of research methods. There are journals dedicated to advances in methodology (e.g., [[1]](http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-neuroscience-methods/), [[2]](http://www.biotechniques.com/)), but the closest concept I've encountered to a field dedicated to researching research is <NAME>'s classic work [The Structure of Scientific Revolutions](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions) and other similar philosophical works, which discuss how science, as a field, progresses and evolves.
I would guess that the reason for the lack of such a field is such research is part and parcel of the actual work done in the field. In order to study biochemistry, one must understand *how* to study biochemistry; in order to study mathematics, one must know the types of questions and the methods used to find answers in mathematics. Each field is unique, and each field will find specific methods that will optimally serve the needs of that specific field. While there may be broadly-applicable research techniques, each field will solve the problem of "how to do research" differently, in the way that best suits that field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is plenty of *"research on research"* (or *"science of science"*).
There are dividid into different fields, e.g.:
* [Scientometrics](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientometrics) - measuring citations, networks of collaborators, relations between topics and other quantities characterizing the scientific output.
* [Sociology of science](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology_of_scientific_knowledge) - treating science as a activity of groups of people, with its history etc.
For example there is a great book [<NAME>, Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact](http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/202695.Genesis_and_Development_of_a_Scientific_Fact).
* Research on *collective intelligence*, *innovation* (when, where and how does it happen), etc.
* General fields related to education, didactics, teamwork and management.
As you asking about *engineering* (i.e. how things work in practice), I don't even mention things like [philosophy of science](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science). Also, as you see, the answer depends on scale - from an individual, through a group or an institution to a country, the world nowadays or our civilization.
Typically it is done under umbrella of complex systems, complexity, network science, econophysics or data-mining and modeling in sociology. There are institutes doing it, see e.g. the front page of the [Santa Fe Institute](http://www.santafe.edu/). Also, there are some projects on it, e.g. [QLectives](http://www.qlectives.eu/).
ADDED:
As you are interested in the optimization (not only the observation) and on the micro scale: some findings may implicitly give hints, e.g.:
* <NAME>, <NAME>, [Critical mass and the dependency of research quality on group size](http://arxiv.org/abs/1006.0928) (2010) says that you need a critical number of researchers to make it working smoothly,
* <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, [Scaling properties of European research units](http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903190106) (2009) says that the larger an institute, the higher percentage of administrative workers it has.
Other things may be harder to find, as in science it works a lot in apprentice-master mode, with approaches differing from a group to a group. So it may be not as easy to be serialized (as in different fields, countries, etc. one may need to have different approach); and when you don't a large enough sample, you cannot use quantitive methods in a meaningful way.
Moreover, now we are in the phase preceding formalized studies, as only recently people started to share with the world their *soft and subjective* findings on that matter, e.g.:
* [Materials for Nurturing Scientists](http://www.weizmann.ac.il/mcb/UriAlon/nurturing/index.html) (a collection) on [Uri Alon Lab website](http://www.weizmann.ac.il/mcb/UriAlon/) (BTW: he is the right person to talk about it, as he promotes such exchange of information on research)
* <NAME>, [Whitesides' Group: Writing a Paper](http://www.egr.msu.edu/~mason/teaching/How2WriteApaper.pdf) (2004)
* <NAME>, [Advice on giving a good powerpoint presentation](http://www.d.umn.edu/~jgallian/goodPPtalk.pdf) (2006)
and on things like [academia.SE](https://academia.stackexchange.com/), for a bit of self-reference.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/04/23 | 488 | 2,012 | <issue_start>username_0: Related to but different from [Should I include a publication where I'm only acknowledged (and not one of the authors) in my CV?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1112/should-i-include-a-publication-where-im-only-acknowledged-and-not-one-of-the-a)
I'm a part of some publications which officially are written by author A and B and then the Team Members. Should these publications be on my CV? I contributed to the project (hence the team co-authorship) but don't want to seem like I'm trying to pad my CV.
Currently I have my publication list broken up by sections: Journal, Talks, Technical Reports, and then Other, and I have the Team Member publications listed under Other.
Is this appropriated and/or reasonable, or should I remove them?<issue_comment>username_1: * If you are listed as an author in the paper, then you can always include the paper in your publications list.
* If you are pruning your resume to be a 2-page one and if you have better publications (say where you are the lead author) to show, then have a single category titled "Selected Publications" and exclude this paper.
* If you are making a very detailed list of publications, say one on a webpage, then do consider including the name of all authors in the same order as in the published paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Looking at the CV that's linked to your website, I don't see anything inappropriate about what you've done. The only thing to make sure of is that when you have a team listed explicitly as the author in a paper (e.g., "Author X, Author Y, and The A-Team"), you will need to make sure that there is a publicly available listing of the team members available for reference. This could be as a supplement to the paper online (as "supporting information"), or it can be on a permanent web site for the team's endeavors. However, people should be able to confirm that you are a member of this collaboration beyond just what's on your CV.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2012/04/23 | 660 | 2,933 | <issue_start>username_0: I have successfully got my papers accepted in different journals. However, due to some money issues, I couldn't get them published. Now I have my final project presentations.
Will it hold value for me? I have slogged day in and out to accomplish this, but money constraints have shattered everything.
How do I manage my presentation in such a scenario?
**EDIT** : I do have all the email conversations and acceptance notifications and do have the feedback as well.<issue_comment>username_1: Reputable journals will waive publication charges for authors who cannot pay them, so you should ask about that. If everything goes well, then that will simply solve your financial problems. I see only two ways you can get stuck:
(1) The journal insists you can pay, perhaps because your advisor has plenty of grant money, but your advisor refuses. In that case you have a serious problem, and it is much deeper than just paying for these publication charges; you need to sort things out with your advisor.
(2) The journal does not have a procedure for waiving the charges. In that case, the journal acceptance is worthless. The journals in this category are money-making operations with no academic validity. Nobody will care that they accepted your paper, because they just wanted your publication fees.
The first thing you need to determine is which case you are in. For example, one valid reason for an advisor to refuse to pay is because the journals are not reputable. If you are in that case, then you need to rethink everything. Otherwise, it sounds like you may be in a complicated situation with your advisor.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This would raise a red flag for me generally - I've never published in a journal that had publication fees just for publishing the papers themselves. Color charges, sure, and if I had submitted to an open access journal they have fees, but nearly every one of them has a mechanism for waiving the fee in the case that the author can't pay. My four suggestions are this:
* Make doubly-sure, as @AnonymousMathematician has stated, that you're not accidentally trying to get published in a for-profit vanity press journal. These won't actually do you much good.
* Contact the journal and see if you can get the fees waived, if they are indeed a legitimate scientific journal.
* Get in touch with your institution's librarians. Universities often have discount deals with some publishers, are members of groups that waive the fees, etc. Make sure you're not covered that way.
* Stop submitting to journals with publication charges if you don't have grant backing. Submitted, or even accepted papers that aren't in press (and it sounds like will never see the light of day) don't do you much good. Those papers are currently just rotting there - no journal is good enough for you to let your work languish without publishing it.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/04/23 | 1,003 | 4,348 | <issue_start>username_0: Consider an undergrad student (who wishes to dive into STEM research) in an obscure university in an obscure town who has a few ideas which he converts into a well documented article. All of this by learning completely on his own. He has no faculty within his institute (or locality) to turn to (they aren't as active in research) for help.
Where should such students/learners try to get comments/criticism on their work?
* Sending it out to publishing is not a good idea because it will get rejected with cliched answers and will rarely help the candidate improve his work.
* Stackexchange/Quora/Reddit etc. are great for small answers but it is too much to ask to read and rate someone's work
* One can send out mails but Professors/Grad Students/Researchers in the field might not have the time to reply to such mails. Further, if the work is fundamentally flawed, the student might never get replies.
* Any other repository site (ArXiv?) might cause the paper to be drowned by more successful ones and the student might never get comments.
What can he do?<issue_comment>username_1: It may be that even if the faculty at the institution are not themselves active in research, they are likely to know people they are (after all, they got their own degrees somewhere). The best route, if at all possible, would be for one of the the local faculty to put the student in touch with someone who is active in research. The personal introduction makes it much likely that the work will get actual feedback. (I'm assuming here that the student has actually talked to the local people and determined that they're not interested; just because a faculty members isn't currently active in research doesn't automatically mean they don't care and won't be able to help an interested student.)
If that's not an option, the student might be able to meet researchers through some sort of event, either one aimed directly at undergraduates (for instance, in the US, there are many summer programs for undergraduates), or even just by attending a conference and trying to meet people. This may not be an option (summer programs require being accepted, for instance, and attending a conference on one's own can be expensive).
If that's off the table as well, it may be time to personally e-mail researchers in the area. It's true that there's some risk the work will be ignored, but there are steps that can be taken to minimize this: choose a person to contact carefully, making sure it's someone actually interested in the exact topic of your research (on the one hand, you want it to be someone you cite, or at least someone who's worked directly in the area, but on the other hand, you don't want to e-mail the biggest name who has anything to do with the subject); and write a personal e-mail which makes your situation clear without being too verbose, and which explains why you're e-mailing this particular person.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You want to try a combination of **networking** and **learning how to ask good questions**.
1. Networking—you have to find people in your field in order to grow, and you can only find people in your field by networking appropriately. Try to find money in the department/broader university to attend a conference, or even just email authors of papers you cite. Describe your situation (briefly). If they're local, ask to meet with them for 30 minutes-1 hr; if not, try for phone calls.
Do note that, generally speaking, graduate students/postdocs will be more willing to give you time than advisors; try to get in touch with them as well.
2. Asking good questions—you can and should assume that no one has time to act as your advisor. Because of this, your interaction with those whom advise you will be brief. Make the most of those minutes. Give a summary of your work, ask very directed, substantial questions. Make the most of your meetings.
Personally, the most productive meeting I had in the entirety of my just-under-five year graduate school stint was one with a member of my thesis committee, and the entire meeting lasted 15 minutes. I gave the right background, asked the right questions, and came away with what turned into my thesis project. (I don't think I've done that well since.) Do your homework, and you may benefit nicely.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2012/04/24 | 860 | 3,703 | <issue_start>username_0: I wish to pursue my MBA in a premier business school. Is it better to go straight from my graduation (B.Tech in CS) or get some work experience and then go on with MBA?<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, MBA is something that you do when you have significant work experience. There is a good reason for that. If you go straight from your graduation into the program, you will learn a few thing on the theoretical side of business administration. But if you already have encountered troubles in management, you will learn a lot from the numerous case studies (because most of the learning in a MBA is through case studies) and exchanges with other "students".
Moreover, the main advantage of a MBA, besides the few things you learn, is the network that you will acquire, and only a few fellow students will be ready to network with somebody without experience.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree that the more practical working experience you have, the more useful your MBA studies will be. That being said, the purpose of the MBA and the related timing will also be important. I assume you want this MBA to further your career (move outside of the technical/engineering side of your work and into management, marketing, etc.). If you think the MBA is going to help you do that and you want to move into the business side sooner rather than later in your career then it might be advantageous start the MBA sooner, especially since your undergraduate degree is non-business.
It depends on the school I imagine, but when I did an MBA all of the students with non-business undergraduate degrees had to take a set of core business courses before being allowed to proceed on with MBA courses. If you were working during the day and going to school at night I imagine this would add some time to your total time in the program, so getting started early might be a good idea.
Additionally, if you have to pass a test to get into the MBA program (GMAT, etc.) then taking that soon after you graduate might be advantageous as you are still kind of in the "study mode" of school and preparing for the test will be simpler than if you let years go by without having taken an exam. You should check, but I believe the GMAT is good for X number of years after you take it so if you pass it early after graduating you can still wait a while before actually applying. You say you want to go to a top level school as well, so I imagine a high score on this test will also be important. Starting early if you think it will take a few tries to get that high mark would also be smart.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you want to get headhunted or an “MBA salary” after you graduate you need work experience, at least 5 years. However if you want to build your company or move up the ladder later you can do it now.
The MBA is in no way theoretical, you may get more out of it with previous work experience, but you will acquire “real” work experience through study by cases and simulations. You get to solve real world problems, and that gives you experience. Also, a Business School is a microcosm of the working world and you have teachers/bosses to please, team-members/colleagues to manage, bureaucratese/paperwork to deal with, etc.
Many programs do accept MBA students straight from undergrad.
Networking? Vaguely heard of it but never experienced it, especially as a foreign student. Maybe that was real in the dark ages when there where 20 MBA programs in the world. Now when there is a B school behind every bush and corner I do not believe in such think as networking. Though I may be wrong especially at top universities MBA programs.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/24 | 2,230 | 8,892 | <issue_start>username_0: As with many papers in the sciences, there are multiple authors who aren't physically close to each other. I was curious about the most efficient and simplest way to technically share the writing. On the more complicated side would be LaTeX and subsequently using subversion to merge all of the changes. Then there is google docs. Finally, there is the traditional write out edits on word and email the document with comments back and forth.
What works?<issue_comment>username_1: It also depends on what should be the final format of your document. For instance, I write all my articles in Latex, and when collaborating with other researchers, I use [BitBucket](https://bitbucket.org/): I create a Latex repository, and give access rights to the other authors. One good aspect of BitBucket is that they have a special plan for academics, where you can get an unlimited number of collaborators for free. In order to avoid conflicts as much as possible, we usually decompose the main document in one file for each section, and we try to avoid working on the same section at the same time, but even if it happens, then it's usually possible to easily merge the different edits. One nice feature is the possibility to automatically receive notifications when one author commit her changes. Also, since anybody can create a BitBucket account, there isn't the problem of creating an account to an external collaborator on an internal server.
Of course, BitBucket is not the only possibility, and one could also use [Git](http://git-scm.com/), or even [Dropbox](https://www.dropbox.com/), although for the latter, I don't really like the lack of native versioning system.
On the other hand, if I don't work directly on a paper, but for instance on a draft for a project proposal, then I use [Google Docs](https://docs.google.com/), because it's quite simple to do some collaborative editing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If your collaborator is not technically inclined, then there are a few possibilities:
* [Google Docs](https://docs.google.com/)
It is very simple, robust and real-time (no need of thinking 'which version is the most recent'). I created a lot of documents with it (though only 1 scientific article). A good idea is to use different colours so that it is clear who wrote what. One drawback is that it may be not as simple for equations and than you will need to copy things from there to LateX manually.
* Annotating PDF files with [Adobe Reader](http://get.adobe.com/reader/) or sth equivalent
Also simple and robust. However, as it is not real-time you need to keep track of which version is current and it is not possible to make changes in the same time. Here you are the only person responsible for changes in LaTeX file.
* Annotating or changing with [OpenOffice](http://www.openoffice.org/), MS Word or another office package...
Another variant which allows you collaborator to make direct changes, at cost of some robustness.
As a practical remark for the two last: always keep track of the version, e.g. `draft_20120424_prof.pdf`, where you add both date of the last edit (not `final5`!) and name of the last editor. When exchanging things by e-mail it is easy to loose track which version is the most recent and in fact lost changes (often not knowing about that.)
Other possibilities, requiring some technical knowledge:
* [writeLaTeX](http://writelatex.com/) or sth similar ([ShareLaTeX](https://www.sharelatex.com/), [ScribTeX](http://scribtex.com/), [LaTeX Lab](http://docs.latexlab.org/) - the one using GoogleDocs, ...)
Tools for editing documents collaboratively (in real-time) and compile it within one's browser (so no need to install anything). Though some knowledge of LaTeX is required (at least to know how not to spoil a file).
ScribTeX(the only one I used) gives version control and you can see which lines were changed (as in version control system), so not need of guessing what might have been changed.
EDIT: ScribTeX is being replaced by ShareLaTeX.
writeLaTeX has live preview and may be the most suitable for beginners.
* [Git](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(software)) or another version-control system, e.g. at [GitHub](https://github.com/)
However, it may require technical skills beyond edition of LaTeX. While it is not hard to use it, I never did [I am using](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5277/why-use-version-control-systems-for-writing-a-paper) it for writing papers and I would never try to use it with someone with low computer literacy.
When it comes to [Dropbox](http://www.dropbox.com/) - it is a good stuff for sharing files for a project but NOT for making changes in files. First, you never know *when* the changes happen. Second, you don't know *where* the changes happen.
There is also an article on it: [Research tips - Online collaborative writing](http://robjhyndman.com/researchtips/online-collaborative-writing/).
See also a few questions:
* [Simultaneous collaborative editing of a LaTeX file](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/27549/simultaneous-collaborative-editing-of-a-latex-file) - [tex.SE](https://tex.stackexchange.com/)
* [Tools for collaborative paper-writing](https://mathoverflow.net/questions/3044/tools-for-collaborative-paper-writing) - [MathOverflow](https://mathoverflow.net/)
* [Compiling documents online](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/3/compiling-documents-online) - [tex.SE](https://tex.stackexchange.com/)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If you're working with Word documents, Word 2007 included a *very* nifty merge changes feature. [This online help document from microsoft.com](http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word-help/merge-comments-and-changes-from-several-documents-into-1-document-HP001221654.aspx) details how it works, but doesn't really do the feature justice. See the following screenshot for an idea:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qRNnZ.png)
Briefly, you can click on "compare" (in ribbon, third from right), and it lets you choose two source documents. From there, it opens the very nice interface shown above, with the two source docs on the right, the merged doc in the middle, and the changes on the left (or bottom, you can hide it if you don't wan t it). You use it like any other "track changes"; just go through, change by change, using the "previous", "next", "accept", and "reject" buttons om the Changes section of the ribbon. When you're done just save the combined document, and you've got your merged doc.
I've used this a number of times, and it's a very useful feature. By far the best aspect of this is that it can be used with the technically incompetent. Just tell them, "take the document, make changes, I'll deal with it"; I've used this with my technologically challenged boss a number of times, and it's been a lifesaver. Given your situation, this may be your best bet.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: We do token passing and some kind of method to exchange the files. I think this method was covered in the comments but let me elaborate it here. I'll use Word as an example, since chances are if you're doing manual token passing, it's because you haven't been able to convince anyone in your team to switch to LaTeX, and people who don't want to switch to LaTeX are probably the type who don't want to deal with version control.
The "shared folder" is the mechanism you use for sharing files. It could be a Dropbox folder, email, WebDAV, a remote directory on an SSH-accessible server, etc.
1. **Locking**: Person who starts with the file renames it so that their name is on the end. They send an email to the group saying, "I am locking Section 1." List the locks in the email.
2. **Unlocking**: This is a multi-step process.
a. If no one else **unlocked** a section before you unlocked, then you can rename the file to the current date and time, then put it in the shared folder.
b. If another collaborator **unlocked** a section before you unlocked, then you must take the latest version off of the shared folder, copy the section you were working on, and paste it into the latest version you just downloaded. Rename the just-edited file to the current date and time, then put it in the shared folder.
The reason you do it this way and not the other way (copying and pasting everyone else's sections into your document) is because doing so means you have to keep track of what everyone else did, whereas this way you only need to keep track of what you did.
That's basically it. The biggest problem is when someone's not paying attention and doesn't merge properly, or when two people try to lock something at the same time (since Email has a delay) but usually you'll have to have someone who knows the process keep an eye out for it.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/25 | 1,444 | 6,236 | <issue_start>username_0: In EE/EC/CS departments, there are certain fields that are theory-based (like the algo or complexity groups), ones that lean towards systems implementation (OS, programming languages, etc) and others have a component of both (like networking).
In such a field like networking, there are professors who work on hard-core math modelling ([example](http://www.ifp.illinois.edu/~srikant/)) and people who work on implementation and protocol design ([example](http://nms.csail.mit.edu/~hari/)). From what I glean from my own paper-reading experience, the natures of these papers are as different as chalk and cheese: the math papers seem to look for ways to cast the problem in a mathematical framework and try to derive their results from such a set-up, while the implementation-oriented papers conceive of some algorithm and a protocol (based solely on logical argument rather than any rigorous mathematical premise) and present the results of their software simulations.
While on paper people argue there is no divide between theory and practice, at least to me the approach towards research differs widely between faculty members in the same field and department. Now to my questions:
* How important is math emphasis in an applied field like networking? Industry work is almost always simulation-based from whatever I have seen. After all, networks are there to be implemented and deployed, so why bother about probabilistic modelling?
* When there are two modes of research in a particular field, will the PhD student's approach play a role in faculty recruitment?
* Is there a widespread notion of one being superior to another? I know of professors and students who widely emphasise math and pooh-pooh "S-BAA: simulation based on arbitrary algorithm" type of papers.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> How important is math emphasis in an applied field like networking?
> Industry work is almost always simulation-based from whatever I have
> seen. After all, networks are there to be implemented and deployed, so
> why bother about probabilistic modelling and research? In other words,
> why should an engineering department award a degree to a thesis where
> the problem has an engineering cause, but everything is simply applied
> math?
>
>
>
In these fields, math is a tool, as coding or lab experiment. Even if you have a full mathematical analysis of a protocol, you have to conduct experiments, because real life is not one of our - too simple - models. Why bother on probabilistic modelling? because we have to find ideas for designing algorithms, hoping that the performance in the real world will be somehow related to those in the formal model.
>
> When there are two modes of research in a particular field, will the
> PhD student's approach play a role in faculty recruitment?
>
>
>
Yes it almost always will. You apply in a team, probably the team is inclined in some of the ways, and want either to make the team even stronger wrt an approach or, to the contrary, to open itself to other ways of thinking.
I also remember my own recruitment, where the fact that I am in the middle (maths + experiments) was a big plus for me- since people assumed that I will be able to speak to a lot of people in the lab, from theory to practical people (and that's what happened).
>
> Is there a widespread notion of one being superior to another? I
> know of professors and students who widely emphasise math and
> pooh-pooh "S-BAA: simulation-based on arbitrary algorithm" type of
> papers.
>
>
>
At the end, only one thing is important: making things that work. You will always find people that think that the theoretical approach (resp. the experimental approach) is superior to the experimental approach (resp. the theoretical approach). Both are wrong, what we want is usable (in real conditions) algorithms with guarantees (controlled error, correctness, etc.), how we achieve this goal is interesting for us, but not the main point of our research (***recall that the question is about engineering research***).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: * **How important is math emphasis in an applied field like networking?**
Networking is an enormous field, which runs the full spectrum from pure mathematics to actual real-world deployment, with many shades of applied mathematics, algorithm development, modeling, simulation, and experimentation in between. There are far more than "two modes of research" in networking, as you put it. Mathematical emphasis is fundamental at the mathematical end of the field, useless at the deployment end, and somewhere in between in between.
To put it differently, it depends on what you mean by "networking".
* **Why should an engineering department award a degree to a thesis where the problem has an engineering cause, but everything is simply applied math?**
There is no contradiction here. I'd estimate that somewhere between a third and half of our engineering faculty at my university can legitimately call themselves applied mathematicians. There was even a small but serious proposal a few years ago to move our mathematics department into our college of engineering.
* **Will the PhD student's approach play a role in faculty recruitment?**
Of course! Hiring patterns at my own university (in both CS and ECE) suggest that the networking PhDs most likely to be hired as faculty comfortably bridge the so-called gap between theory and application, speaking to both camps in their native languages, and applying techniques from both camps to Actually Make Things Work. (Sylvain's answer is consistent with this observation.)
* **Is there a widespread notion of one being superior to another?**
Of course. Networking people are people. As in any other wide-ranging field, many experimentalists think all theoretical work is pointless symbol-pushing, and many theoreticians think that all experimental work is mindless hacking. They're both wrong. **Some** theoretical work is pointless symbol-pushing, and **some** experimental work is mindless hacking, which is exactly as it should be. Neither viewpoint is "better"; they're just different.
Not chalk and cheese, but chocolate and ginger.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2012/04/25 | 3,376 | 13,257 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a social scientist working primarily on Linux, but also at times required to work on Windows systems at the University. I have been looking to improve my productivity in the academic workflow which primarily consist of:
1. Collecting literature, reference-management, review notes etc. (currently zotero)
2. Outlining, writing long documents (currently Lyx)
3. Task, time and project management (currently misplaced and lost pieces of paper)
I can imagine that these steps apply to most academics, and many will share my interest in developing a more productive workflow. In my research on potential solutions to this issue, I keep being drawn by [org-mode](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Org-mode) as a potential swiss-knife solution that can take care of all these needs, and be my mainstay as a personal-information-manager, organiser and text editor. But being built on [emacs](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emacs), I find it forbidding. I also have no need to program anything, so learning emacs seems like major overkill for my needs.
Could academics who use org-mode or a similar solution for organising their workflow give examples of ***how*** they use it? Also helpful would be an evaluation of productivity improvements that such users have themselves experienced, and the kind of productivity improvements that can be expected with a basic academic workflow described above. I am interested in evaluating whether it pays off in terms of productivity improvements in the face of what appears to be a massive learning curve, especially as I don't need any programming tools?
I am aware that this might lead to subjective opinions, so I would request academics with a similar work profile to reply based on their personal experience regarding the learning curve, possible benefits, example cases and perhaps alternatives they have found superior (preferably also cross-platform and open source).<issue_comment>username_1: I am an academic [history] who adopted org-mode about 18 months ago. Frankly, I'm puzzled by all the warnings about the steepness of the emacs learning curve. For a newcomer who doesn't do a lot of command-line work, the hardest part for me was configuring emacs on my Win and Ubuntu machines. But there are lots of resources and tutorials out there, many of them accessible from orgmode.org.
I started out only using emacs for org-mode. After watching a few screencasts I knew enough to start outlining. Gradually i've been using emacs for more and more tasks outside org-mode, though that remains my main use for the editor. I've been gradually increasing the complexity of my workflow over the last year, adapting bits of the various GTD setups linked to the org-mode.org. I am not a programmer and had only started working with a Linux machine a few months before getting into org-mode.
In my opinion, one of the obstacles to greater adoption of org-mode is that people see the amazing workflows set-up by gurus and assume they need to use emacs at that level. My opinion: for writing, organizing and work-flow, you can get 80% of the ultimate value of org-mode in about 20 minutes of instruction.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I use org-mode as an grad student (computer science), and primarily use it for throwing together fast documents. It isn't great for papers/articles, but it is great for homework and notes, because it uses markdown for formatting. There is very little to learn here that can't be found in the manual. See the sections on exporting/publishing, and pay attention to the parts on LaTeX.
I used to use org-mode for scheduling and it was great (I went on vacation and lost interest in tracking all of my time). It's great for tracking how much time you spend on projects and doesn't need much configuration up front.
I also used it for collecting references, but that took some nontrivial configuration. It wasn't hard for me because I'm used to programming, but your mileage may vary.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I use [Org-mode](http://orgmode.org/) and [AUCTeX](http://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/) (Emacs LaTeX package), to do all three tasks
you outline. I have an Org folder that I sync across machines using
Dropbox, which I find to be a simple solution for someone who does not
use version control on a regular basis.
Organization
============
I separate my tasks into broad groups with each group getting its own
.org file. For example, I have .org files for administrative tasks,
journal publications, service, research topics, and any major projects
that I am currently working on.
The structure of an .org file is relatively simple, for example a file to
track journal submissions, revisions, etc. may look something like this:
```
* Initial Submissions
* Accepted
* Rejected
* Revisions
* Book Chapters
```
Org-mode uses asterisks to denote levels of headings, and to
fold and unfold the headings. So expanding the revisions heading would
lead to:
```
* Revisions
** Paper 1
** Paper 2
DEADLINE: <2012-05-04 Fri>
```
You can set deadlines for any task by pressing `C-c C-d`, which will
generate the the DEADLINE: line you see above. Setting a deadline for
a task will make the task show up in the agenda view (accessed through
`C-c a a`), which is my main project planning tool for day to day
work inside of Org-mode.
You can also track the time you spend on tasks with `C-c C-x C-i`,
which will clock you in to a task and `C-c C-x C-o`, which clocks you
out. The tracked time will show up in the agenda view and can be
useful for project planning or reporting. You can also generate
separate standalone tables inside your .org files if you prefer a bit
more customization.
All of this can be done with a vanilla Org-mode install and no
customization. I have my tasks set as multi-state TODO lists that I
can cycle from TODO->STARTED->WAITING->DONE->CANCELED. I have my
keywords set in my .emacs configuration file with the following:
```
(setq org-todo-keywords
'((sequence "TODO" "STARTED" "WAITING" "|" "DONE" "CANCELED")))
```
The `"|"` separates in process keywords from finished state keywords.
If you are looking for more elaborate reports, such as Gantt charts,
my answer to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1215/662) briefly discusses some of the options
available.
Outlining
=========
For outlining and writing long documents, you can just create a new
.org file and outline using the \* heading approach. Org-mode makes it
easy to move headings around if you want to restructure your document
at any stage. For example, if you had this outline:
```
* Intro
* Part 2
** Part 2a
** Part 2b
* Part 1
** Part 1a
** Part 1b
```
You realize that Part 1 should really come before Part 2 so you move
the cursor to the Part 2 heading and press `C-`, and Part
2 and all of its subheadings will move to the proper position.
```
* Intro
* Part 1
** Part 1a
** Part 1b
* Part 2
** Part 2a
** Part 2b
```
Depending on your needs, writing a paper based on the outline can be
done in much the same way. Org-mode has support for LaTeX, both for
inline fragments and for environments. Since you mention LyX, I would
imagine the transition to stand-alone LaTeX should not be too onerous. The Org-mode LaTeX export does a fairly good job but if you have a document with a significant amount of LaTeX syntax, it may be better to just write the draft in LaTeX using AUCTeX, but this is beyond the scope of the question.
Reference Management
====================
I use a combination of Org-mode and RefTeX (available with AUCTeX) to
manage my references and to make notes. As mentioned in [John
Moeller's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1364/662) this takes some non-trivial configuration. I used
[this setup](http://tincman.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/research-paper-management-with-emacs-org-mode-and-reftex/) almost verbatim to start my reference management, and I
have found that it works well. [This link](http://www-public.it-sudparis.eu/~berger_o/weblog/2012/03/23/how-to-manage-and-export-bibliographic-notesrefs-in-org-mode/) was inspired by the same setup and may be useful for both reference management and writing drafts in Org-mode that contain extensive references.
I start with a master .bib file, that contains the bibliographic
material for each reference. After adding updating the .bib file, I
use `C-c )` to insert a new heading into my notes.org file. The
customization will generate a heading with the title of the paper and
a link to the PDF of the paper. For any notes I take on the paper, I
can use the rest of Org-mode's abilities to either have multi-heading
outline style notes as subheadings, or just write paragraphs separated
by a blank line. The end result is an .org file with headings for
papers, textbooks, etc. and subheadings for each paper with links to PDFs and all my notes in a single file.
Tips for Starting Out
=====================
There are a few ways to help smooth the way to working with Emacs,
Org-mode, and AUCTeX.
1. Install Emacs 24 pretest instead of Emacs 23. Emacs 24 has package
management included in the vanilla install which makes it much
easier to add packages without a lot of programming experience. It
also has Org-mode included in the default install. [This link](http://batsov.com/articles/2011/10/09/getting-started-with-emacs-24/) gives
instructions for a variety of operating systems. I have been using it for awhile now and I have found it to be very stable.
2. Go through the Emacs tutorial, accessed via C-h t. This will give
you the basics of navigating using the Emacs keys. It will likely
take some getting used to, especially how Emacs handles selection,
cutting, and pasting. This will likely be the biggest hurdle if
you are used to the cutting/pasting/navigation in word processors.
3. Keep [this reference card](http://refcards.com/docs/gildeas/gnu-emacs/emacs-refcard-a4.pdf) handy. It has nearly all of the commands
that you will use on a daily basis.
4. For Org-mode specifically, look through the [manual](http://orgmode.org/manual/index.html), but more
importantly look at the [tutorials](http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html). Specifically the general
introductions and the power users describe their setup sections
(the first two sections linked above). These tutorials will
highlight the customizations made to the initialization file
(.emacs) for these users. Even without elisp experience, you
should be able to find something close to your desired workflow and
be able to modify it with some trial and error.
When I started with Emacs and Org-mode I had very little experience
with Emacs. A vanilla Org-mode install with no customization is still a powerful tool. As you get more comfortable with working in Org-mode you can start to work on customization. Even with very little interest in programming there is a significant enough user base that someone may have already done something close to what you are looking for.
After I got comfortable with Org-mode, I started using [Bernt Hansen's set-up](http://doc.norang.ca/org-mode.html) with no
changes. It is a bit intimidating on the whole as he has some extensive customizations, but he documents them well and explains almost everything he does.
Then after using it for awhile, I was able to modify
the initialization to something that better suited my workflow. It
took some trial and error and a bit of extra time on the learning
side, but I believe that it has payed off in the long run.
Once you are comfortable with Emacs, I would also recommend the [Emacs
wiki](http://emacswiki.org/). It has some descriptions of useful packages, some discussion,
and even some configuration suggestions to help build up your
initialization file. If you ever get to the point in your setup where you think, "I wish I could do XXX", the odds are someone else has written a package that covers what you need.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I really like <NAME>'s org-mode setup. I am not a programmer and I do feel a little lost in Emacs, but I'm having no trouble using org-mode. I started with Vincent Goulet's Emacs package because I also use emacs to edit latex and R scripts. Then I added Hansen's code to my .emacs file a few sections at a time where it seemed applicable to my workflow, editing slightly when I could decipher it and see a way to make it more applicable. It took a couple of days plus little tweaks occasionally since, but very manageable.
In addition to what has been mentioned, I use clocking into the different steps of a project almost religiously because I am working on estimating the time I spend on different tasks in order to better plan future projects. I've been terribly over-optimistic with promises of submitting work in the past.
Finally, I would highly recommend JabRef for literature management if you want to stay with free open source software. I've had no trouble with RefTex---I didn't have to do anything beyond Goulet's instructions. JabRef imports references in the usual way (e.g. Reference Manager, etc) and has a database-like interface, but creates a bibtex file in the background. Citations in Latex (in emacs) worked perfectly.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/25 | 1,219 | 5,393 | <issue_start>username_0: While making some paper search in my scientific field, sometimes I find articles that are not published in journals or conference proceedings, but as **technical reports**.
In my experience, I've never written a technical report, and I've never even been asked to do it.
So I was wondering: what's the difference between a technical report and a scientific paper?
Why some researchers publish a work as technical report instead of sending it to a conference or a journal?
When do you suggest to write one instead of addressing it to a conference or a journal?
PS: It seems to me that writing technical reports is more diffused in English-speaking world than in Continental Europe. Is it true? Why?<issue_comment>username_1: The main advantages of a research report is that it's published very fast, and without reviewing process. From what I've seen, a research report is basically used:
* to publish a longer version of a paper, for instance including proofs or detailed examples that couldn't fit in a version submitted to a conference.
* to put a timestamp on an idea, in order to be able to claim "We did it back then"
* to create a reference that can be cited for project reporting, even though the work has not been published (yet).
* to make a pre-print document freely available, for instance if the published version is behind a paywall.
Such features are particularly useful when one wants to disseminate (for instance sharing with some colleagues) some unpublished material. Basically, I'd say that most of this can also be achieved by submitting the paper to a public repository, such as [arXiv](http://arxiv.org).
EDIT: considering the language question, intuitively, I would say that when research reports are used in the publication process, it's likely they are written in English. If a non-English speaking university does not offer a mechanism to submit research reports written in English, that might explain why it's not used. However, I've written research reports in France and Italy (in English).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Perhaps it varies by field but other uses I have come across in my field are;
* Required by a grant funding agency (i.e. a report of the findings from the study to the grant agency). [Here is such an example of a NIJ report](https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236057.pdf). These tend to be *much* longer and more detailed than a single journal article.
* Reports disseminated by other institutions. For instance, the non-for-profit I work for releases technical reports that we want to disseminate to the public (the same goes for the state agency I work for). The material *may* be the same as subsequent journal articles but the intended audience is not limited to academics and is much broader. [Here is an example of this by the RAND corporation](http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP325.html). Another popular one in the Social Sciences is the [Campbell collaboration library of meta-analysis](http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/library.php).
These are similar to what Charles stated, but I would nit-pick a bit with the motivation. They aren't always just another means to disseminate what are otherwise journal articles. It is also a very potential heterogeneous field of papers. The RAND and Campbell articles I cited above are typically considered very high esteem (and go through a similar peer-review process to more typical journals). But pretty much any agency can release a technical report (put your agency name on it and post the pdf on the internet) so they can vary dramatically in quality.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the answers already posted, sometimes when a professor is given a [professorial chair](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professorial_chair) (endowment), he or she is required to submit formal documentation describing the research done while "sitting in the chair." Some departments/colleges/universities will accept (non-refereed) technical reports in lieu of refereed papers just to get around the technicality.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In the particle physics world---where we have large organization that operate for decades---"technical report" is one of the several names given to internal documents and communications with the funding agencies that are intended to
* communicate important technical details between units (e.g. the accelerator division needs to inform the experimental scientists of the operational limits of the beam position monitors)
* propagate and preserve specialized knowledge and competencies
* to document details that won't be written up in a paper for many years (large experiments often leave off writing a detailed description of the experiment as built and run until after several data papers have appeared; by the time you get ready to write this "instrumentation paper" many of the people who installed the device may have moved on)
* provided supporting justification for grant requests and project proposals
* demonstrate readiness to actually start spending money on conditionally approved projects (which is essentially *all* US projects in the post SSC era; and both the Europeans and the Japanese have similar administrative protections)
Accordingly most particle physicist will spend some time writing such documents every few years.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/25 | 1,149 | 4,837 | <issue_start>username_0: When I was applying for grad school, I felt that my CV was pretty empty and so I included all my research related presentations (posters/talks) from conferences/competitions/etc (11 of them at the time). However, I am not sure how much of a role they played in my acceptance at that time (I feel I mostly got accepted based on my papers and two very strong reference letters).
Now I keep a semi-complete (semi- because of infrequent updates) list of presentations on my website; this is mostly so I can post slides. However, I feel the list has gotten too long for a CV (~25 items; about a full page) and other more important parts of my CV (such as publications) have grown to need that space more.
**When should I start omitting or shortening the talks on my CV?**
If I include a 'selected' talks section: How many talks should I select? Should I select them based on prestige of venue, or uniform-covering of my interests, or uniform-covering of my time (show that presentations are a regular activity)?
More context: I am at the graduate-student level in my academic progression. A related question: [Do presentations given during interviews count as invited talks?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/1157/66)<issue_comment>username_1: First of all: note that there is a difference between an academic CV and a resume.
* An **academic CV** typically lists everything you've done related to academia; every talk, every conference paper, every award, every grant, every mentored postdoc, grad, and possibly undergrad.
* A **resume** is a two-page document that summarizes your work/academic experience.
(Terminology may differ, some may refer to the first as a resume also; semantics aside, there is a distinction between the two documents.)
That being said, the answer to your question depends on which document you want to complete. The first should have everything, no matter how old. The second should list your most important, more recent accomplishments, in the interest of space. Regarding the second, the answer to "when should I remove stuff" is simply "whenever you have newer and better things to put in it's place".
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As you do more things, you can become more selective with what you list. I think most computer scientists quickly stop listing conference talks for papers that already appear in their CV. Then you can stop listing small talks you gave at your own department, etc. People who are very well established often become even more selective, listing only the big invited talks. You have to figure out the right balance to strike.
I think there's no right or wrong answer -- it's just a matter of how you want to present yourself and what you want to emphasize. I also don't think that section is at all the most important. It's good to show you've gone around and given some talks, but I think you're mostly evaluated on your actual research. Also, I don't understand the concern of running out of space on a CV; CVs unlike resumes have no page limits.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Here is what I do. I distinguish between talks/posters where you basically just applied and paid the conference fee versus any talks where someone invited you.
A poster where you just submitted an abstract often just means you paid to attend the conference (there is normally a bit of filtering to exclude any overtly commercial offerings, but this is not peer-review, as 90+% of things are accepted). Things like a department seminar, where every student can or is even required to present, similarly just means that you were attending that school. So, do not have these on your CV as you probably already list which schools you attended.
If, however, you got invited to give a talk somewhere, this is different as it means someone thought it was worth their time and money to have you come over and give them your ideas.
As for talks or posters related to peer-reviewed conference proceedings, list them as such ("peer-reviewed proceedings publication" or some equivalent formulation) and not as talks.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: What I've seen from faculty candidates and faculty has been a graduation to "Invited talks" after a certain point on their CV. Invited Talks cuts out talks that you did at conferences (because it's assumed if your paper got in then you went to present your work) and stuff you volunteered to do. It does include when you've been asked to go somewhere to present (e.g., job talks about your research, when your advisor invited you back to talk about your new research/company, etc.) So if you feel like that section is getting really long, that's one thing you could do.
Your mileage may vary depending on your discipline though, this is specifically in Computer Science.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/26 | 860 | 3,452 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been to a few conferences that worked based on precirculated papers. That is, everyone submits their papers in advance and the assumption is that conference goers who come to a given talk have read the paper in advance. In principle this seems ideal, we can use that face-to-face time to discuss work instead of just listening to people read their papers (this people reading their paper at a conference thing happens all the time in the humanities). In what circumstances should conferences precirculate papers? Is it something that is best for small conferences, or are there good examples of large conferences that work this way too?<issue_comment>username_1: I can't see this happening in any sort of large-scale conference. This would involve too much work and logistical planning on the part of everyone involved to be successful. It's hard enough to get abstracts for many conferences—let alone finished papers far enough in advance that people have time to read them!
In addition, this last point is another major obstacle: people don't have a lot of time to read all the papers that we're supposed to, let alone a bunch for a particular conference. The main reason why I would undertake that much work was if it were for a relatively specialized workshop in my personal field of endeavor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've seen some workshops in the CS field (more specifically in a subfield of Software Engineering, e.g. VaMoS - see [workshop format](http://uni-leipzig.de/~vamos2012/?q=node/1) -, in which there is a kind of "precirculation of papers", before the event take place. The workshop format includes a kind of "discussion session", in which, before attending the event, one paper is sent to an attendee other than the paper's (set of) author(s), so that he/she is in charge of reading the paper and preparing some discussion slides. During the event, after the paper's presentation, the discussant will provide attendance with his/her point of view on the paper, thus promoting the actual "discussion session".
Indeed, it is a small-scale precirculation of papers, in a sense that a paper is sent previously to only a few people (usually an author of another paper). However IMHO such a format provides event's participants with an interactive environment (in the worst case, at least you, as a paper author, will be sure that at least one another peer has read you paper... lol).
Quoting the mentioned [workshop website](http://uni-leipzig.de/~vamos2012/?q=node/1):
>
> Each session will be organized such that discussions among presenters
> of papers, discussants and other participants are stimulated.
> Typically, after a paper is presented, it is immediately discussed by
> pre-assigned discussants, after which a free discussion involving all
> participants follows. Each session is closed by a general discussion
> of all papers presented in the session.
>
>
>
To be very honest, I guess it's not feasible to do such a thing in big conferences, due to time constraints, but for small (and focused) events, like workshops, I guess this idea is very welcome.
As I said before, there are some other workshops that follow this same format: [FOSD](http://planet-sl.org/fosd2012/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=90%3aworkshop-format&catid=35%3apresentation&Itemid=313) and [PLEASE](http://please2012.haifa.il.ibm.com/format.shtml).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2012/04/26 | 490 | 2,148 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it better to contact a publisher early in the writing process so that the editor can be involved in shaping the project, or is it better to submit a full academic book manuscript? In my case, this would be for a first academic book. If this is something that is dependent on particular academic fields my field is digital humanities.<issue_comment>username_1: Book writing is a very thankless task—it takes a long time, and the profits probably don't make up for the cost of the time it takes you to write the book, unless you happen to write a textbook that becomes the default for a field. On the other hand, in some disciplines (particularly in the humanities), a published book is practically a requirement for tenure, so you'll want to make sure that you do things right.
So my advice would depend upon where you are in the process. If you haven't already started writing, I'd shop around a prospective outline of the book plus an introductory chapter or two *before* you get too much further. Then you'll have a sense of what the publishers would be interested in. If you've gotten a lot written, then you just need to start shopping the full idea around.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I don't know what is better, but I think it depends on where you want to publish. I can only talk about my limited experience, hoping it will be helpful.
I've published a book with the MIT Press, and when my coauthors and I decided to contact them, the book was far from finished, but we had enough content for them to have an idea of what to expect -- which was one of their requirements. We then had to answer questions to help them decide whether or not our project would be worth their time and investment and to tell them when we would be done with the final (preprint) version of our manuscript.
They haven't been involved at all in shaping the project as you say, although they did a wonderful job of proofreading the final text. Which was a relief, given that none of us are native English speakers. But I have the feeling that publishers typically limit themselves to that job.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/26 | 929 | 3,995 | <issue_start>username_0: How to write a cover letter to journal when submitting a manuscript?
1. In the letter, it is expected that I propose 5 referees. Is this the only reason to write a cover letter?
2. Will the cover letter be sent to the referees or only to Journal's staff?
3. I feel reluctant to praise my contribution in the cover letter. The article should defend it itself. Is the praising important part of the cover letter? Is it required?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. It is also polite to write a cover letter, even if nobody asks for it. And the purpose is often to ease the process of finding the referees, so helping to do so by giving insights about the paper that cannot be write in the paper is a good thing.
2. If you mention potential referees, I guess it will not be sent to the chosen referees. Otherwise (in my experience) it is.
3. You don't have to praise your results in the cover letter. Just state shortly the results (say more than the abstract, less than the introduction). If you think that there are issues related to the paper, this is also the place to state them (conflict of interest, new way of considering something - which can hurt someone's feelings -, direct negative comment on related work, etc.). If you think that, because your paper is gap-bridging, you need reviewers from several fields, you should say it as well.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: 1. Sometimes it could be. Sometimes one has to explain some prior publications and how they relate to the current manuscript.
2. Usually, the cover letter is not sent to reviewers.
3. Brief statement should be fine. It is not required.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: 2. Nowadays when referees interact with the journal on-line, the cover letter (if any) will be available to them. (Of course you send it electronically to the journal, right?)
3. No praising.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: This depends on the journal. In one journal i am involved with a cover letter is actually required and needs to contain a declaration that the manuscript is not under submission elsewhere and won't be sent elsewhere before the journal made a decision. And reviewers always get the cover letter.
From a reviewer perspective i think a summary of the paper contributions is not needed, as i am going to read about them anyway. If the paper is based on a conference contribution (and in my field, CS, this happens a lot) then a description of the differences is very useful, so i do not have to spend additional time reading the conference paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: If you are aiming for a high-impact general-interest journal, then the goal of the cover letter is to avoid editorial rejection.
When you are aiming at a broad journal that takes lots of submissions (e.g., PLOS ONE) or a field-specific journal that sends pretty much everything out for review, a bare-bones cover letter as described in some of the other answers is probably fine.
If you're aiming for something where there is strong editorial selection, however, it's a different matter. A good indicator you are dealing with such a journal is if they make a point of inviting pre-submission inquiries (though some don't). In this case, most papers are never sent out for review: they are rejected by an editor as "not being of sufficiently broad interest" or "not likely to have sufficient significance" or something of the sort. In this case, the cover letter is a big part of the decision, because the cover letter is the first impression you will make on the editor, and is where you can explain your work and its significance more informally.
The form that I have seen used for cover letters of this type is approximately as follows:
1. Short summary of the paper and its key results
2. Explanation of the significance of the paper
3. Explanation of the community who will find the paper interesting (which should be one of the key communities served by the journal)
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/27 | 401 | 1,447 | <issue_start>username_0: This question is similar to [Rules for affiliation for student doing unpaid research in his/her free time?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/890/546) and [Is it acceptable to publish a paper using an affiliation with a former employer?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/1078/546) except that I am a retiree.
I intend to submit a paper to a journal without mentioning any affiliation because I am no longer employeed. I have been thinking about a footnote in the paper indicating I am a retiree from my former employer for two reasons: I am receiving pension from the company pension fund and it is a well-known company in U.S. Using their name may make me look good. On the other hand, I feel like it's cheating because I am not their employee anymore.<issue_comment>username_1: The best source of advice on these issues are the journal editorial staff. Some journals may require you to list your last affiliation with the word "retired" added in parentheses; some journals may prefer you not to list an affiliation at all. Some others may not care.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Here's one approach: “(Ret.)”; subtle, direct, and in the literature (see 2):
>
> 1.Department of Earth Sciences University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
>
> 2.Global Volcanism Program, Smithsonian Institution (Ret.) Washington USA
>
> 3.USGS Cascades Volcano ObservatoryVancouver USA
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/28 | 917 | 3,964 | <issue_start>username_0: I occasionally receive "cold-call" applications from graduate or postdoctoral candidates interested in working in my research group. Most of the time, they are of no interest—it's just a "form letter"-type application. However, once in a while, I get an application from someone who I would consider giving an interview to—if I actually had an open position.
What I want to do is to let people know that I *am* interested in such candidates, even though I don't have an open job for them. Is there a way to express this interest, and to encourage them to apply again when a new position becomes available. Is there a good way to do this—most of the time, such emails sound very trite, and that's exactly what I'm trying to avoid.<issue_comment>username_1: **This answer is about faculty candidates, not graduate student or postdoc candidates. (I misunderstood the original question.)**
First, be honest with the candidate, both about your interest and about your ability to hire. Yes, we are very interested. No, we don't have any regular faculty slots this year. Yes, we would love to fly you out, have you give a talk, meet with some of our faculty and students, maybe have a chat with the dean, and see where things go from there. Make no promises you can't actually keep.
Second, a lack of open slots does *not* mean it is impossible to hire. Your college or campus may have finds set aside for "excellence" hires, or for cross-departmental research initiatives (like "clean water" or "computational science"), or for dual-career families. Some other overlapping department may be willing to give you half a slot for a joint appointment. Another faculty member in your department or college may have just unexpectedly retired, resigned, moved to administration, failed to get tenure, or died. Your dean may be impressed enough (or encouraged enough by other senior faculty) to give you an extra slot just for that person *next* year.
Creating a slot takes a lot of legwork and a lot of political capital—you may burn a future slot even if the candidate doesn't come. So they'd better *really* be special, and you'd better know that they'll come if a position is actually offered.
Yes, I have seen this work.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Being in the situation of looking for postdoctoral positions, I can at least give you my feelings of how I would understand that the person I contacted is interested, but cannot provide a position right now:
* First of all, replying is already a good sign of interest. There are many persons who don't even take the time to answer to an official application for an open position (apart from the standard acknowledgement email), and you have to consider that you don't get the job if you don't hear from them. So, if you take the time to answer, that shows that you have at least a bit of interest
* Then, if you provide a "personalized" answer, that shows that you took the time to read some of the applicant's papers, then it's clear that you are interested, and even if you can't provide a position, you might be interested in a collaboration.
* The ideal would be if you can invite the applicant to give a talk, even though it's clear that there is no job following It would be a good opportunity for the applicant to talk about his work, to get some practice, meet new people, and that can also give you the opportunity to talk about creating a project together.
Basically, when one contacts a professor even though there are no official open positions, there are no really high expectations. But knowing that the professor is interested, but has no funding, is great, because it also opens the possibility to apply for a position in one year or two, when some funding is available. In order to show your interest, you can consider it as offering a potential collaboration: you can't provide money, but you would be glad to work with the applicant.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2012/04/28 | 443 | 1,970 | <issue_start>username_0: I am wondering if it would be worth emailing departments that I haven't applied to this year, asking if they'd be willing to take a look at my application material. Any advice, or should I just wait till next year?
I applied to too few places this year, because I couldn't afford all the application fees. I'm saving up now but I feel bad that I don't have anything planned for next year, and I really want to begin my higher education since I feel strongly about it.<issue_comment>username_1: For the most part, yes, it is too late to be considered for graduate admissions at most programs for this coming fall, as most schools have already made their decisions as to who they will admit.
That said, if you are an exceptionally qualified candidate, and unusual circumstances have taken place, it *may* be possible to be considered by specific programs. However, there has to be some really strange events taking place. (For instance, one school I know had a banquet during their one prospective students' weekend, and accidentally food poisoned everybody—and ended up with 20% of their expected yield of students. They probably would have loved additional late applicants!)
But, basically, you'd need a department that had a major shortfall of accepted students compared to their research needs, and you'd need to be a candidate that would be strong enough to accept in the regular admissions cycle.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The short answer is yes it is too late. The long answer is that usually only top programs have only one round of admission and other schools actually have also a spring round of admissions so you could trying going for that. This is not common but I found a few schools that do that, and some of them are actually decent schools. But I would say 85% don't accept late applications.
How about getting a lab tech position at your current school and get more experience/pubs under your belt?
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/04/28 | 1,059 | 4,410 | <issue_start>username_0: As a scientist, the idea of a "research notebook," or its functional equivalent, has been well ingrained into me. However, it's not clear to me if this is a universal phenomenon, or if it's limited to the sciences.
For students working in the humanities and other fields—such as literature, economics, or philosophy—what is the working equivalent of the laboratory notebook? If not, what is the preferred method of keeping records in those fields?<issue_comment>username_1: I asked my wife, which works in art history/egyptology. So first, "it depends of how the person works" ;).
However, it seems that many people are making a large number of thematic reading synthesis, research notes (as we do) and she also pointed out the importance of her personal database, where she stores archaeological artefacts, their descriptions, the related bibliography, personal notes about them, their relations, etc. According to her, this is THE most important thing for her work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From my impression, the nearest equivalent would be an academics' text source repository. This could be a library of theoretical works personally owned (and almost certainly monographic rather than papers). It could be a set of commonly referenced canon texts spread across four or five libraries in their region that they consult. It could be the items above plus documentary series such as archives, cultural texts.
The objects manipulated, day to day, in conducting humanities research are texts; whether these are straight texts, or the meanings developed from physical records, or the meanings developed reflecting on terse problem statements.
In my experience, some scholars keep detailed notes, and others don't. I try and keep my notes and sources in a deep text searchable database with what meta-data I can cheaply acquire. There is no standard for keeping a repository, and the way in which a scholar learns to keep an adequate repository is idiosyncratic.
There isn't a disciplinary standard for keeping a repository, above and beyond "study skills" type courses which aren't mandatory or systematised. To evidence of the adequacy of the "experiment" equivalent scholars demonstrate their mastery over the relevant texts by providing evidence of firmly supportable readings through citation and footnoting, or by quality argument.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Personally I've not heard of a dedicated "research notebook" in my discipline history, as may be used in the sciences. Like username_1's answer it very much depends on how a person works.
In history, as username_2's answer alludes to, most of a person's ideas or arguments are gleaned from primary documents. Because of this it becomes very important to be able to keep a track of the primary documents that may be relevant to your area of research. Personally I use Mendeley to keep track of everything and the notes/annotations I make in that go someway towards forming my research arguments later. I note though that even the use of software like Mendeley is not common in my department.
I believe one of the advantages of the research notebook is that it can keep track of when work was conducted by date, something that I have never heard mentioned in the Humanities. The disadvantage of this is that there is no way of proving when you may have had an idea based on your readings.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think you really need to understand research methods humanities, and this varies field to field.
One (but not the only) approach are Qualitative Data Analysis(QDA) [methodologies](http://onlineqda.hud.ac.uk/methodologies.php) used widely enough to support a small industry of software vendors delivering (often very expensive) QDA tools. Examples include [Atlas-Ti](http://atlasti.com), [NVIVO](http://www.qsrinternational.com/industry/nvivo-in-education), [QDA Miner](http://provalisresearch.com/products/qualitative-data-analysis-software/) and [Tinderbox](http://www.eastgate.com/Tinderbox/Using/UnderstandingWhatPeopleS.html).
These tools provide the closest thing I can think of to a 'research notebook' for academics in the humanities.
[Understanding what people say](http://www.eastgate.com/Tinderbox/Using/UnderstandingWhatPeopleS.html) is a QDA example in Tinderbox, representative of the sort of work done in QDA tools.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/29 | 906 | 3,743 | <issue_start>username_0: What's a tactful, respectful way to notify job applicants that you won't be hiring them? I see a lot of angry online discussion of this issue. Nobody seems to like the common "if you don't hear back, you're not hired" approach, but it's easy to go wrong in other ways (too short, too long, too condescending, too cheerful, too early in the hiring season so it seems insulting, too late so it's no longer useful, etc.). Of course, part of the problem is that being rejected is intrinsically painful, so nobody's ever going to enjoy a rejection letter. The question is how to provide useful and timely information while avoiding adding unnecessary pain.<issue_comment>username_1: Just from a perspective of one who has been rejected a lot of times (although from schools and research programmer, then as an undergraduate), fast and informative feedback is the most important.
For me there is little difference between hearing *"the competition was very high"* and *"get out"*. Saying that *"there was only one place"* when if fact you don't want to hire someone is very short sighted. It may make the decision smoother, but in a long run it will create false impressions and hopes; and, in fact, such approach makes it impossible to say that actually you want to hire someone, but you run out of positions (see [How to show interest in a candidate when no positions are available?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1297/how-to-show-interest-in-a-candidate-when-no-positions-are-available)).
Moreover:
* waiting long is bad both psychologically and for practical reasons (i.e. other plans); I don't see a reason for not rejecting as soon as you are sure,
* it is important to distinguish if you don't want someone now or at all,
* any feedback is of great value;
otherwise one gets no idea what was wrong, if it makes sense to apply again and how to improve; I would love to hear *"there were 5 places but only 1 funding for someone with your status; I had expected someone with stronger skills in X and Y (but your Z is more than fine)"*.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to Piotr's answer, I would add that it also depends on the profile of the applicant. For instance, if the applicant does not have a CV that matches exactly the ad, then there is nothing wrong to answer with a succinct "Sorry, your profile is not what we are looking for": the applicant took a chance, to see if a different profile could be of interest, sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, and there is no shame in "failing" in this case.
However, if the profile matches, but is too weak, then it could be helpful to point out if the applicant is good, but there was a better one (in which case it might be worth to keep in touch in case the stronger applicant decline the offer, or leaves for any reason after a few months), or if the applicant is just not good enough (for instance, not enough publications, not enough publication in top conf/journals, not enough external collaborations, not enough teaching experience, not enough grant applications, etc). I guess it's worth doing so at least for short-listed applicants, who took the time to come for an interview, and maybe a public talk, and that can help them understanding what points they need to focus on in the future, especially for the youngest applicants.
That being said, I also know that some recruiter can be reluctant to give detail as to why they didn't recruit an applicant because they are afraid that it could provide means to the applicant to official contest the recruiting process, and maybe sue the university. In this case, I would suggest to say this kind of things by telephone, i.e. without leaving a written trace.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/29 | 983 | 4,388 | <issue_start>username_0: Many of you probably have already lived these career turning point: your PhD program is going to end, and you have to choose an university research group to apply for a postdoc position.
**Which factors do you consider as more important in this choice?**
Take research group X at university Y.
Which factors you consider to decide if it's worth to write to them for a postdoc opportunity?
* Research group project's affinity with your PhD research work?
* Research group's excellence, and international ranking of its team
leader researchers?
* Research group members' human affinity with your personality (if perceptible)?
* Research group project's scientific novelty and genius?
* University excellence, and its international
ranking?
* Distance from your hometown? Proximity to your hometown?
* Salary?
* Going abroad?
* The university city/country way of life?
* Other elements?
Please tell which of these (and other) elements you consider the most important (or by giving a percentage to each, if you want).
Many thanks! :-)<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I think the frame of this question isn't quite right. I would argue that these are criteria that I would use if I were choosing between multiple postdoc *offers*, but these are not necessarily appropriate when deciding where to *apply*.
What I would do is decide what my "deal-breakers" are: that is, what are the criteria that would prevent me from accepting an offer, regardless of how good it is? For instance, if you need to take care of an ill family member that lives in a specific location, then you're probably not going to want to consider international programs. Similarly, if you're determined to go into industry, you're not going to be inclined to take a purely theoretical postdoc project.
However, once you've decided upon those deal-breakers, if you then see a project for which those criteria do not apply, then you should go ahead and submit an application. You don't have much to lose by doing so.
Once you have the offers, the challenge is tougher. All of the criteria you've listed are valid, and it's hard to say which of those might be the most important—it all depends on your own personal circumstances. One hopes that research concerns are the most important of all, but as I've mentioned above, there are valid reasons why that might not be the case. The only thing that I would make sure of is that whatever option you decide for in the end, it helps you in moving on with your career beyond your postdoc. There's nothing worse than getting stuck in "PD purgatory," where you can't really stay as a postdoc any longer, but are having problems moving to a permanent position afterward.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: username_1's answer points out two very important points: the deal-breakers and the PD purgatory. Basically, your choices of postdoc should reflect somehow a strategy to get a permanent position at some point. Hence, you need first to understand what kind of position you eventually want (for instance a teaching position or a "pure" researcher position, academic or industry, which country you want to be), and then understand which aspects of your profile you want to strengthen.
For instance, if you already have strong publications and you want to work only research, you might be more interested in going abroad and strengthen your network and your ability to work in international projects. On the other hand, if you lack some strong publications, then you might be more interested in finding a place where you could get such publications, for instance in a team with which you already have some collaborations and ongoing projects.
If you want to teach, then you need to look for places where you can be involved in teaching, which also means that you need to speak the local language (or to go somewhere where the teaching language is English).
If you eventually want to get a permanent position in a country where internal recruitment is basically the norm (from what I've seen, Italy seems to qualify for this) then you need to take into account the fact that you will need to go as a postdoc in this country eventually.
So, I think you first need to assess your current profile, and to understand what are your expectations for your permanent position, in order to see what could be best for your postdoc.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/04/29 | 373 | 1,321 | <issue_start>username_0: I think I have seen it spelled both ways.
Is one spelling more common or formal than the other ? (e.g. in the U.S.)<issue_comment>username_1: According to the New Oxford American Dictionary (that I have by default on my Mac :)):
>
> The spellings adviser and advisor are both correct. Adviser is more common, but advisor is also widely used, especially in North America. Adviser may be seen as less formal, while advisor often suggests an official position.
>
>
>
Since it's an official position, I'd rather go for **Ph.D. advisor**
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I grew up learning the spelling as "advisor," which goes along with "supervisor." I've never seen "superviser," either, and "adviser" just looks strange to me.
This may actually be a *field-dependent* issue: in academia, I've always seen "advisor" as the preferred spelling (and [a number of schools agree with that assessment](http://www.agriculture.purdue.edu/agcomm/ontarget/0502/adviser_advisor.htm)). However, outside of academic contexts, "adviser" seems to be preferred, both in the UK and the US, [as shown here](http://grammarist.com/spelling/adviser-advisor/).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In my high school, my teacher said it is British English Vs American English.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/29 | 1,000 | 4,338 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a question.
>
> Can all the professors in a department see a particular student's grades?
>
>
>
Can the chair of a department see a student's grades?<issue_comment>username_1: Officially and in general, no.
The teacher of a class should in general not share grades with his colleagues. Informally, however, there might be some communication of individual students' performance in ways that don't violate confidentiality: "she did very well on my class"; "he struggled on the exams, but did a very good job on the final project." Typically, this would be in the context of a colleague inquiring about hiring a student as a student worker or as a graduate student. Aggregate information could also be shared without harm to enable better matching of teaching to student needs and abilities.
That said, there are exceptions to this rule. For instance, your academic or research advisor will typically have access to all of your grades. Similarly, an evaluation panel—such as one that convenes for a graduate student's qualifying exams—will probably have access to all of the student's academic record.
But a random professor generally will not see a student's grades in all courses. This is by design and a logical move.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This seems to have changed somewhat recently at our school. I used to only have access to the grades of my advisees and perhaps current students. For the last year or two though, I seem to have much wider access.
A student from another department stopped by to talk with me about possibly attending grad school in our program. I looked him up in our computer system, and could see his whole transcript (which classes were taken in which semesters and the course grade for each). I've never looked up transcripts for students who I don't somehow know (either my advisee, or in a class I'm teaching, or at least someone who has asked me advising questions), but for the last year or more **I've had access to every student transcript that I've looked for**.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: At the college I taught at, it was forbidden for anyone to reveal grades to anyone. The only people who had access to grades were the teachers who taught the course in question (I could see your scores only for classes I taught you) and counselors. Other teachers did not have access. Of course, some teachers did share grades informally.
In the Vietnamese university I teach at now, grades are posted publicly and actually emailed to every other student in the same cohort and teachers freely share grades with each other because they are not considered private.
In short, it depends on the rules and regulations where you are in addition to the informal relationships around that institution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Another variant of the various models described in these answers, to illustrate the vast diversity in procedures and how there is no globally correct single answer to the question:
I am most used to **exam corrections being community efforts**. That is, when a (written) exam of a class by one professor has taken place, the **whole department of that professor will be asked to help checking the exams**. This is so the (substantial!) workload of correcting 50+ exams is shared.
In effect, it usually means that a considerable part of the PhD candidates of the department will do the checking, and often (as one person checking one particular task across all students is more efficient than one person checking all tasks only for a small set of students) this means that each of these PhD candidates will have seen the overall performance of each student in the exam.
Summary: **In some places, it can be assumed that everyone within one department knows about student grades in some way obtained from that same department.**
*As a rough guideline, this can easily mean **some 20 people or more** were involved.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: As others have mentioned this depends upon the place where you are.
In Spain, at the end of each term the grades of all the students registered for each of the available courses are publicly posted on a board.
I suspect it might be similar elsewhere in Europe. I remember seeing similar grade spreadsheets posted on a board here in Finland.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/30 | 3,335 | 13,571 | <issue_start>username_0: I will soon finish my PhD and start searching for a post-doc position and I was wondering which web-based solution is the best suited to present myself and my work (I work in plant biology).
I see two main options: social network type, such as [**Academia.edu**](http://www.academia.edu/) or [**ResearchGate**](http://www.researchgate.net/) or a **personal page** (using for instance Wordpress).
My concern is that social networking solution does not offer a lot of flexibility (attaching documents, presenting my current research more in depth), but I do not want to seem too pretentious by having my own webpage while I am just a PhD student.
My question is then:
>
> Isn't it too soon to have a personal web page at this stage of my career (I am still a PhD student) to present my work or is the pre-made solution more adequate?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps it's different in other fields, but in math, it isn't pretentious for a PhD student to operate their own website, and it's quite common. (Most schools, at least in the US, provide the space for students to host a personal website.)
Furthermore, I'd say that after a couple years, a PhD student (again, in math) absolutely should have a personal website. Formats oriented around published papers or formal CV aren't very useful for giving information about a grad student because there isn't that much of either. If I meet someone or hear about them from their advisor, and want to learn more about their work, a personal website is best way to get some information about where they're likely to be when they finish.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Personally the professors and PhD students I remember well are the ones with an elaborate page for themselves. From what I have learnt from this site, a PhD is simply not merely about publications, citations and academic work. You need to build contacts, make friends and network in the academia, which as such is a small place.
Having a page for yourselves is hardly pretentious. It is just like having a Facebook profile or a Twitter account, a means to show others that you are alive and kicking. And publications are not the only thing you may have there. Add a lot of extra-curricular details, your non-academic passions and interests, some photos that may make people take interest in you as a person.
For further details, I would like to redirect you to some wonderful answers to [the question I asked here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/726/on-being-a-well-known-phd-student).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As soon as you have even a single preprint, people will begin searching online to find out who you are and what else you have done, so you must have a web page. It doesn't have to be elaborate, and it's enough to start with a few lines of professional contact information and a list of links to papers, but you have to have something.
I think a generic web page looks more professional than one created using a social networking site, but perhaps that's because I'm old. However, there is one absolutely critical issue: the page must allow visitors to download any content without logging in. At least one of the social sites lets visitors view papers on the site, but insists that you create an account if you want to download anything. This is terrible! In my experience, nobody's going to create an account unless they really, really want that paper, and either way they are going to be unhappy at the imposition. Offering access to papers and then harassing anyone who tries to download them leaves a very bad impression.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: I think that a web presence is a must in academia (at least nowadays!).
At the very least you should have a site for the current course you are teaching, as a graduate student. This is not necessary, but it is starting to become expected by students (although, who cares what they think ;) ). I think a webpage is good because you can update it at a moment's notice, almost everyone has access to it, and if not, it's easily done, and you can also provide solutions for problems, quizzes, and past exams, as well as have links for cool math-y things (my area of expertise), wolfram alpha apps, java apps, matlab code, etc.
However, I believe that this post was inquiring more along the lines of having a webpage as an early researcher. In that regard, yes and yes (and dare I say yes again?).
Having a general page of your research interests, several sub-topics, collaborators, and even, (dare I say it?), a personal portion of it about you, is a good idea. People expect to be able to access documents for pre-prints, post-prints (assuming you have the appropriate copyright), software, CV, etc., and at this point it is not unreasonable for them to think so.
I would also suggest having a site not at your university. You can redirect your university site to your other site and you don't have to worry about migrating files over when you move from grad to post-doc to post-doc to tenure-track at a tier 1 research institution (except for maybe the last transition).
Also, if you host your own site, you can have your own diaspora pod running, and we can move more towards open-source networking.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You should be sure to make your papers available somewhere (to the extent the jounral policies allow, or more at your own risk). The options are:
* **Personal webpage –** IMHO a must-have, but I'm in math/TCS, in other fields it can be different.
* **[arXiv.org](http://arxiv.org) –** open-access reliable scientific works repository, I like it.
* **[LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com) –** looks similar to other social networking sites, but is more carrier-oriented, you can put any publications there, and link them to either your homepage or arXiv or whatever, or don't link them at all, that's up to you.
* **[ResearchGate](http://www.researchgate.net) –** I have no true experience with RG since it's not so popular amongst my colleagues. But it seems to me that you can both put the whole article there, or just put the reference there with the option that people can ask you to send them the paper. This is very nice since you need not to break any journal's policies to make it work.
* **[Academia.edu](http://www.academia.edu) –** IMHO a no-no since [their Terms of Service are pretty bad.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16050/why-does-academia-edu-reserve-the-right-to-sell-modify-and-exploit-my-papers)
For me, I have a homepage, LinkedIn and I put everything on arXiv. It seems to be a good amount of various resources, so that people can find me easily, but I don't spend too much time with maintanance.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I'd like to add to @tohecz's answer that one important point to consider are the self-archiving policies of the journals you publish in.
E.g. [Elsevier](http://www.elsevier.com/about/open-access/open-access-policies/article-posting-policy#accepted-author-manuscript) usually allows you to put your accepted manuscript on your personal home page but not into repositories like ResearchGate (exception is arXiv)
>
> Elsevier's AAM Policy: Authors retain the right to use the accepted author manuscript for [...] permitted scholarly posting provided that these are not for purposes of commercial use or systematic distribution.
>
>
> Elsevier believes that individual authors should be able to distribute their AAMs [...] e.g. posting to their websites or their institution’s repository [...]. However, our policies differ regarding the systematic aggregation or distribution of AAMs [...]. Therefore, deposit in, or posting to, subject-oriented or centralized repositories (such as PubMed Central), or institutional repositories with systematic posting mandates is permitted only under specific agreements between Elsevier and the repository, agency or institution, and only consistent with the publisher’s policies concerning such repositories. Voluntary posting of AAMs in the arXiv subject repository is permitted.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: In addition to the options listed in tohecz answer, it could be quite helpful to set up a **Google Scholar Profile**, see e.g. these links for details:
* <http://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/citations.html>
* <http://fyi.libmedia.nymc.edu/?p=2517>
* <http://libguides.lib.uci.edu/content.php?pid=215869&sid=3311417>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: While sites like [Academia.edu](http://www.academia.edu) and [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com) offer built-in 'networking' facilities and mean that one doesn't have to learn anything technical, in using them as one's primary academic web presence one is handing over control of one's professional identity to a third party whose goals are far from guaranteed to be aligned with one's own.
If nothing else there is the obvious threat that they may go out of business and leave one's web identity untethered, so to speak. They might also decide to run adverts against your profile, sell your data to other companies, and so on. With a personal website on one's own domain there is a level of control and security that can't be obtained from these other services. Convenience and ubiquity are benefits, but they should be weighed against other considerations, not taken as overriding reasons for action.
To answer the question more directly: it is (certainly in my field, philosophy) perfectly normal and appropriate to have a personal website while still a graduate student, and there are numerous advantages to doing so.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> I was wondering which web-based solution is the best suited to present myself and my work
>
>
>
Advantages of social sites are only of technical nature:
* Easy to get started
* Currently (at least for ResearchGate) not cost of having the site
* You don't have to deal with SEO / design / availability of the site
The advantages of your personal side are more interesting:
* **Flexibility**: You can create the page like you want it. You can upload demos / focus on stuff you like.
* **Explorability**: You can have your own e-mail address which you can put on papers (and not change it). If you have <EMAIL> or something similar, people might have a look at yourname.com when they see the email address on a paper.
* **No / other spam**: You don't get spam from "social" features informing you of stuff you don't need to know (that was the reason why I quit ResearchGate). You might get more spam to your e-mail address, though.
* In combination with [ORCiD](https://orcid.org/), you can get started relatively easy. You can manage your papers on ORCiD and link to your ORCiD account on your personal site. Your personal site is the one always being "the main thing", then you can also try other sites and just link to your profile there.
* **You own your stuff**. A social site - no matter how big - might permanently go down or change it terms of service to something you don't like. When you have your own website, you are independent.
What I particularly did not like of ResearchID is that they created other links of my papers. They added another first page with their logo / link to the PDF and then came the arXiv PDF. People were asking me through ResearchID for papers which are easily available through arXiv.
What you might consider for a personal website:
* Having the basic information: Your name, your research interests, your publications, what you're currently working on. You might have a look at other pages of people in your field / what you're looking for when you are searching for profiles.
* Adding an RSS feed for your papers. Then people can follow you / your publications.
* Microformats such as [hcard-profile](http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard-profile)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: The more platforms you use to present yourself the better. So the right question is not use 1 or 2 or 3 but use 1 and 2 and 3. It depends on a particular discipline but I would suggest to have profiles on the following resources:
* Google Scholar: very useful for others to quickly evaluate your imprint (#papers and #citations)
* ResearchGate: some sort of social network for researchers; saw lots of activities have been happening there for last year or so
* Mendeley: a great organizer of research publications (typically in PDF format); it also positions itself as a social network for researchers; imo, as a research social network and activities on it Mendeley is rather declining
* Academia: a competitor to ResearchGate; didn't use it so cannot comment on whether is growing or declining
* Linkedin: while it is not focused on researchers, a lot of them are there; your profile there can be really advanced and even serve as a proper CV
Lastly, having a web page(-s) describing yourself and your projects is a must. As a very minimum, it might be just one (simple, non-fancy looking is ok) page with your contact information and links to your profiles on platforms mentioned above. Usually, one's department/organization/lab provides an easy way to create/edit such a page. Besides, it is very easy (with no special technical skills) to create your pages (in form of a blog) on some free blog platform. In fact, I would really advocate that PhD students would be pushed to write a blog post about each published work of theirs where the content/ideas/discussion/etc of a publication is described in nutshell.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/04/30 | 581 | 2,419 | <issue_start>username_0: Lately lots of courses like udacity, coursera, and MITx are provided online. I attended most of them; also I have attended courses in OCW provided by MIT. Now I desire to earn some credits for whatever I have learnt so far, so that I can apply for a degree (in electronics and computer engineering).
* Could anyone suggest some place where I will get accredited for the courses I do?<issue_comment>username_1: Most of the courses that I've seen explicitly state that you obtain no credit for doing the course. More explicitly, they may offer certificates of completion, but these certificates do not convey academic credit. For example, from Coursea's [Term's of Service](https://www.coursera.org/about/terms):
>
> This Letter of Completion, if provided to you, would be from Coursera and/or from the instructors. You acknowledge that the Letter of Completion, if provided to you, may not be affiliated with Coursera or any college or university. Further, Coursera offers the right to offer or not offer any such Letter of Completion for a class. You acknowledge that the Letter of Completion, and Coursera’s Online Courses, will not stand in the place of a course taken at an accredited institution, and do not convey academic credit.
>
>
>
So the short answer is that you will be unlikely to obtain such credit. Certainly, read the terms of service to be sure. Nevertheless, you could add such things to your CV to demonstrate your interest in a particular field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are no services to help you get that coursework accredited. However, Degreed.com helps you validate that you have taken those courses so you can let employers know.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are ways to get accredited for completing online courses on Courses as of 2013.
Coursera now offers *Signature Tracks* for some courses, on completing which you get a *Verified Certificate*. In a Signature Track, on submitting each assignment, you are asked to submit some written text as well, which is verified against a handwriting sample given by you at the beginning of the course. There are other techniques used too, such as facial recognition via webcam, etc.
Also, some courses have started to provide an option to give the final exam at a certified Testing Center to earn a similar Verified Certificate.
Each of these, of course, cost money.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/30 | 4,449 | 18,439 | <issue_start>username_0: Obviously this is a question in the light of the recent Elsevier boycott. Currently we do have an arXiv, maintained by academia and where researchers regularly upload parts of their work. In such a case,
* Why do universities spend lots of money to publish in third-party journals?
The question especially applies to journals that operate with a rigorous profit motive. The subscription is very high, so wouldn't publishing in such journals affect the paper's citation count and deter the spread of knowledge about the work within academic circles?
* Why should not universities collaborate to create free, open access, peer-reviewed journals?
Moreover, given the need to conserve paper, why should journals spend on printing research papers? Wouldn't an online version suffice, as most people use only local computer printouts anyway? In other words, why can't we have a Wikipedia-like system of sharing research knowledge, having properly established standards for such journals?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> **Why do universities splurge lots of money to publish in third-party
> journals?**
>
>
>
Because researchers ask for these journals, and the money is given by the university, and most researchers just recently discovered the cost of all this stuff. Now that we are all aware of the cost, and now that universities are running out of money, we, at last, want to change the way publishing is done.
>
> **Why should not universities collaborate to create free, open access,
> peer-reviewed journals?**
>
>
>
Because to run a journal, you need people whose jobs are to run a journal. This is not the work of researchers or actual faculty staff. At the moment, hiring new profiles in universities is unlikely. Moreover, maybe this should be done at a higher level (funding agency or state level?).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a really big question, which unfortunately has no simple answer. Some short comments:
Universities have very little choice about subscribing to journals, as long they publish good papers, since faculty *need* access to those papers to do their research. The solution has to start on the publishing side.
Collaborating to create free, open access, peer-reviewed journals is a fine idea, but either you need to convince universities to support this financially, or you need to recruit enormous numbers of dedicated volunteers. (Whenever this topic comes up, someone is sure to point out that volunteers run some free, high-quality online journals. Of course they do, but the question is how to recruit hundreds of times as many volunteers.)
Printing is a non-issue. Everything is already available online, with printed copies only for those who want them.
In a mathematics context, see <http://gowers.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/elsevierstatementfinal.pdf> and <http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.1351> for more details.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Another (admittedly cynical) viewpoint is that the reason there are so many journals out there, and so many high-priced third-party journals, is that academics want to publish, and the system in which they work more or less demands publications in exchange for career advancement. The need of so many researchers from so many countries, as well as the fractionation of existing research fields into many sub-specialties, allows for this kind of behavior.
Although I would argue that "splurge" is the wrong word—researchers want access to as many journals as possible, and as a result, libraries are *forced* to spend substantial parts of their acquisition budgets on journals, which, with policies like Elsevier's, mean many of them will go largely unused in exchange for a handful of high-quality journals that aren't quite worth collectively what Elsevier charges for them.
The solution will be for the university libraries to join forces together and bargain collectively with the publishers. Working individually, they have no leverage. A hundred or a thousand libraries working together will have an impact.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My take on parts of your question:
>
> Currently we do have an arXiv, maintained by academia and where researchers regularly upload parts of their work.
>
>
>
I may be on something of a crusade against arXiv users who believe arXiv is more than it is, more more widely adopted than it is. "We" don't have arXiv - certain disciplines have it. Other disciplines, equally valid as those which support arXiv, both don't use it and have understandable issues with the reliance on a pre-print site as a way to disseminate findings.
>
> Why do universities splurge lots of money to publish in third-party journals?
> The question especially applies to journals that operate with a rigorous profit motive.
>
>
>
First, they're not paying money to publish in the journals. They're paying money to be able to read said journals. I've published in for-profit journals, even ones my university didn't subscribe to, for free.
>
> The subscription is very high, so wouldn't publishing in such journals affect the paper's citation count and deter the spread of knowledge about the work within academic circles?
>
>
>
Not necessarily. Papers are often available from the author, inter-library loans, etc. Beyond that, how a paper gets cited is a far more complex question than just "Do you have to pay for a subscription", and I don't think Open Access journals have compellingly showed that the citation counts are higher for open journals. The readership and downloads? Probably, but in terms of citation the Open Access journals are still struggling with a perceived gap between their prestige and the prestige of the "leading" for-profit journals. Perhaps that will change in time, but there are ways to get journal articles that your institution doesn't subscribe to, and those ways are often fairly trivial.
>
> Why should not universities collaborate to create free, open access, peer-reviewed journals?
>
>
>
Some do - but for many the cost of laying out and producing a twice monthly journal would be distracting from the core mission of the university (or more likely, particular departments), and they'd run into staffing and budget concerns. Most don't have the money to fund what they actually need to do, let alone add a publishing arm that may or may not ever make money.
And those groups that are interested, like professional societies and the occasional university? They often turn to for-profit publishers to outsource it. For example *Epidemiology*, a publication of The International Society for Environmental Epidemiology is published by Lippincott. *The American Journal of Epidemiology*, which is put out by Johns Hopkins and sponsored by the Society for Epidemiologic Research? Published by Oxford.
>
> Moreover, given the need to conserve paper, why should journals spend on printing research papers? Wouldn't an online version suffice, as most people use only local computer printouts anyway?
>
>
>
Because some readers want the paper versions. Seriously, nearly every journal I know has an "online only" subscription for less money. But if you want a paper version, why shouldn't you be able to get it?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: One of the big factors driving the traditional publishing model is the tenure and promotion process. To win tenure and promotion, faculty members must publish in peer-reviewed journals... and journal reputation counts. Thus, many top researchers will strive to publish in journals with high reputation and university libraries will want to maintain collections that feature journals of high reputation (especially if those journals feature the work of its faculty).
Journal publishers point to the value added during the traditional publishing process, including peer review, editing and layout. This argument, however, is controversial, as many editorial and peer review panels are voluntary, unpaid positions.
Finally, electronic journals are not necessarily cheaper than print journals. Often, electronic journals are sold in expensive bundles and libraries are not allowed to select individual titles (this is how, say, EBSCO operates). Thus, libraries have to pay to subscribe to the whole database, which will include journals that are of little interest to the university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Nothing actually comes for free. Expensive journals tend to have established their merit with a long history, and managing / maintaining that quality across decades and editors has traditionally been the job of publishers. Why?
Although publishing can be a pain, but it is absolutely key to academic progress. We need to be able to rank contributions if for no other reason than to determine what to spend our precious time reading. Like all systems with power, publication is potentially subject to corruption. Publishers are traditionally seen as more objective than authors or universities, since their reputation and income is entirely determined by how good a job they do of publishing selectively.
You could imagine a situation where a bunch of universities got together, dedicated their resources (paid their staff's time) to make an objective publishing system that was not controlled by any one academic institution. But that is actually what most academic publishers are. In fact, many academic publishers *are* associated with individual universities.
The problem remains, who pays? Currently, in general readers / consumers pay, and they probably are really in the best place to know whether research is worth purchasing. But under open access, the authors pay. This can actually be immensely more expensive for universities than paying subscriptions, since they produce a lot of research. For example, my university spends less than the cost of two PLoS open-access articles per year per academic on subscriptions, but most academics are expected to publish a lot more than two articles a year. The other problem with authors paying is that there is then a moral hazard. Journals are effectively bribed to take papers, which may result in compromising the selective process that underlies academic progress. This would be a terrible cost.
Many academics self-publish by putting their papers on line or just writing blogs. This can be effective, but note that it returns to the problem of knowing what is worth reading. Generally, successful academic blogs are run by people who also prove themselves as academics by publishing in highly-rated journals, so this is not really an independent solution.
The short answer then is: because paying to read publications is the best system we currently know.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Publishing journals costs money. If a university publishes journals itself, it bears the direct costs. If a university subscribes to journals, it pays for those costs indirectly. Either way, universities must spend money on journals.
A discussion of why universities pay fees for some journals that are much higher than what is required to run the journal would be useful but not in the scope of the question as written.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: Universities do not have to **splurge** on journals. If you think your university is splurging, then you must consider journals to be a luxury. However, a university with no journal subscriptions would not be able to attract faculty or students.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: In [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/35228/26682) I tried to describe the main strategies of the Open Access movement.
I would though address few points in your question:
>
> Why do universities spend lots of money to publish in third-party journals?
>
>
>
username_4 says, *"First, they're not paying money to publish in the journals. They're paying money to be able to read said journals."*.
This is an important distiction.
Why universities don't always publish journals (not necessarily OA, for that matter) is more of an *organizational* issues. Not all departments have time and resources to do teaching, research and also publish peer reviewed journals.
Many do, now, also thanks to free software like [Open Journals System](https://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/)(as a mere example, [these are](http://journals.unibo.it/riviste/) the open access journals I used to manage for University of Bologna).
**Peer-review** is a crucial point here.
The *self-archiving* strategy of publishing pre-prints in repositories like archive is very important for OA, but doesn't address the need of a validation of publication. The only decent system that academia has found to evaluate publications is the review of its peers (there are also scientometric indicators like *Impact Factor*, but they do not substitute peer review).
>
> Why should not universities collaborate to create free, open access, peer-reviewed journals?
>
>
>
Why shouldn't they? No reasons, if you ask me.
But read this [great joke from <NAME>](http://aubreymcfato.com/2013/01/15/how-to-exploit-academics/).
*Collaboration* is the most crucial issue here.
Academia is a highly competitive social structure. You compete for your PhD, for grant research, for tenure, for gear lab, for everything.
I'm no expert in "history of academia", but I do know that different disciplines (aka, different *communities*) have different attitude to collaboration.
And I'm merely thinking about scholars collaboration between themselves in writing articles or doing research.
When you need a particle collider in order to do research, you are in the need of different scholars, different universities, different *nations* to collaborate at very different levels. This is the main reason, for example, why the field of High Energy Physics is one of the most advanced in Open Access (i.e. "[SCOAP3](http://scoap3.org/) is a partnership of thousands of libraries and key funding agencies and research centers. Working with publishers, they converted key journals in the field of High-Energy Physics to Open Access at no cost for authors").
Collaboration is difficult, and it is not what academia is doing best.
Academia is a very complex *social* and *economic* structure. You cannot fund a system in competition and then ask the same system to set up an mass-scale collaboration to take over the publishers that took advantage of the scattered monadism of academia in the first place.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: This is a very big, multi-faceted question. A hidden undertone is whether academic publishers make too much money, which is not something I want to discuss in this answer. Some thoughts on the rest of the question:
**Do we need journals?** If arXiv is so good, do we need journals at all? Can we do away with journals and just have everyone upload their papers onto arXiv? If you believe we don't need journals entirely then we can also do away with most of the publication costs.
arXiv does have operational costs, so presumably there'd still be a small (say ~$10) charge per uploaded paper, which is a far cry from typical OA costs. On the other hand this would be the end of peer review (at least organized peer review), it would make science communication more difficult, and authors from developing countries could really struggle. Whether or not this is worth it regardless is up to your perspective. This is the most drastic option; for everything below I assume "yes we do need journals".
**Assuming we need journals, costs are to be expected. Who pays for these then?** Realistically there're only a few options:
* Authors. This is open access. OA has the fundamental problem of conflict of interest. Since only accepted papers generate revenue for the publisher, the publisher (and by extension the editorial board) is incentivized to accept papers. The COI can potentially be sidestepped by charging a (substantial) submission fee. Is the academic community willing to accept this, knowing there is a nontrivial chance of rejection? I don't know the answer to this; your guess is as good as mine.
* Readers, i.e. pay-per-view, if you want to view the paper then you pay for it. This is likely doable but an administrative hassle. It's much easier to log in to your university's library and then access every paper, rather than work through payment every time you want to read something. (Also usage statistics for most papers are very low indeed.)
* Universities. This is the current arrangement for subscription journals. A potential cost is that the university also pays for papers that its academics don't read (however you can be sure your library tracks usage statistics, which it uses to decide which journals to subscribe to).
* Advertisers. Does not work in practice since demand for advertising in academic journals is too low to sustain the journal.
* The general public. This is how things work for non-academic books: the author writes, gets paid a royalty, and the general public pays for the books. The problem with this is that academic papers are pretty bloody impossible to sell to the general public. They're so dense that [undergraduates can't understand them](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/110105/why-are-research-papers-written-in-language-thats-difficult-for-undergraduate-s/), let alone the general public.
* Funding agencies. "Someone" pays the publisher, which then operates the journal with free submission and free access. This is the diamond open access model. The problem is who that "someone" should be. If it's a university, then we're effectively back at option #3, worded differently. If it's an academic society, then the question shifts to where they are getting the money from, and likely means they have less money to do other activities like outreach. If it's the government, then unless they put more money into academia, they'll have to move money away from somewhere else, most likely research funding. Is the community willing to take a collective funding cut so there's money to use for this? Again, your guess is as good as mine.
Ultimately, if you can think of a stronger business model, you can put it into practice and it'll probably supplant the former one. The fact that the status quo has largely remained is, I would say, an indication the current business model is the most reliable, however flawed it might be.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/04/30 | 233 | 927 | <issue_start>username_0: Do I expand abbreviations at their first use **per section or per paper**?
This is an IEEE publication, but I haven't come across any specific instructions.<issue_comment>username_1: I would do it per paper, unless the paper is extremely long and some abbreviations are defined (and used) in the start, but not used again until 20 or 30 pages later.
It's okay to remind a reader what the abbreviations mean, but avoid annoying the reader by being overly and unnecessarily repetitive.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The standard is once per "document," whether that's a report, or a book, or a journal article. However, longer documents will typically come with lists of abbreviations and symbols; many journals also do this. Even then, it's still better to define it once in the text first:
>
> standard widget units (SWUs)
>
>
>
before using it again later.
Upvotes: 3 |
2011/10/12 | 1,206 | 4,783 | <issue_start>username_0: According to wikipedia, [grade inflation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grade_inflation) is the tendency of academic grades for work of comparable quality to increase over time. That article also includes plenty of evidence for the phenomenon and lists some potential causes. Has this issue been studied using game theory? What game-theoretic models of the educational grading process exist that could shed some light on the forces behind this phenomenon?<issue_comment>username_1: One paper that looks relevant is "A Signaling Theory of Grade Inflation" by <NAME>, and Suen (2007). From their abstract, it seems like this is what you're looking for.
>
> When employers cannot tell whether a school truly has many good
> students or just gives easy grades, a school has incentives to inflate
> grades to help its mediocre students, despite concerns about
> preserving the value of good grades for its good students. We
> construct a signaling model where grades are inflated in equilibrium.
> The inability to commit to an honest grading policy reduces the
> efficiency of job assignment and hurts a school. Grade inflation by
> one school makes it easier for another school to do likewise, thus
> providing a channel to make grade exaggeration contagious.
>
>
>
Also check out "Comparative cheap talk" by Chakrabortya and Harbaugh (2005). From the introduction:
>
> Are such statements more credible than claims such as “they both look
> great” or “every student is excellent”? How much information can
> comparative statements convey? When does it make sense to withhold
> comparative information? And, are comparative statements still
> credible when the speaker is not impartial, e.g. when a professor has
> a favorite student, or a salesperson receives a larger commission on a
> particular product?
>
>
>
In particular, section 4.2 discusses "Recommendation games". They consider situations where an expert with private information can rank alternatives for a decision maker. Here is their description:
>
> In recommendation games we find that the expert prefers ex ante to
> reveal a partial ranking rather than the complete ranking. For
> instance, if there are three students being recommended by a professor
> and the middle student is unlikely to receive a job based on the
> complete ranking, an alternative is to put the top two students in a
> group and not differentiate between them. As the number of issues
> increases, such groupings can be used more and more effectively to
> maximize the expert’s payoffs. The gains from partial rankings may
> explain why highly ranked schools often obscure the relative quality
> of their graduates, either by grade inflation as in Ivy League
> undergraduate programs, or by withholding grades from employers as in
> some elite M.B.A. programs
>
>
>
One of the conclusion they reach is that grade inflation "should be more severe when average student quality is increasing" so "grades should be more inflated in elite schools". Look into their section 4.2 for a detailed analysis.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Schools want their students to get more than "their share" of jobs. One way to do this is through grade inflation, that may convince employers that the one school's students are "smarter" than those of other schools with "lower" grades.
Of course, when the other schools catch on, they will raise THEIR grades too, cancelling out the first school's advantage, but causing grade inflation.
It's like watching a performance at a standing room only event. Any ONE person can get a better view of it by standing on tiptoes. But if ALL of them do it, this just cancels out. That's what game theory would predict.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_1: As a college professor, I can tell you that student evaluations are a major cause of grade inflation. College administrations use student evaluations of professors as a major determinant in promotions, assigning classes, tenure, any form of recognition.
From the professor's perspective, if you start to get too many bad evaluations, your career is in jeopardy. So, why not go with the flow? Call a C an A- and everyone is happy. Of course, the integrity of the educational system is destroyed in the process.
From the standpoint of the university administration, who wants the hassle of dealing with student complaints? The way to get ahead is to grow your program and generate income. This is especially true of MBA programs that are generally funded not by students, but by their employers. One way to compete with other MBA programs is to make the grading easy, but universities also make the degree programs shorter and the experience more entertaining
.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/04/30 | 877 | 3,694 | <issue_start>username_0: I have offers for tenure-track computational biology positions at a couple of U.S. research universities. What sort of things do I need to budget for in my startup package?<issue_comment>username_1: I'll hopefully be in your position in another year or two, so I'm not speaking from experience. But a few things come to mind:
* Laptop (be specific) and associated technical support
* Any software licenses you need to complete your research and teach
* Office space and furniture
* Lab space
* Lab equipment (be specific)
* Access to shared lab equipment as needed (be specific)
* Access to server(s) where you can test your code/algorithms/etc.
* Access to cluster computing resources (if that fits in with your research)
* Lighter teaching load your first 1-3 years
* Lighter service load your first 1-3 years (not sure if that's something you would explicitly ask for though)
* Salary (and benefits where applicable) for any students, staff, post-docs you will need to be successful in getting papers and grants written
* Money for other miscellaneous expenses that you envision will be necessary
* Money to travel to 1-2 conferences per year
I'm sure others could think of more to add...
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Congratulations on the offers.
With respect to negotiations, you should privately keep track of what you really need, and then ask for a bit more than that in the negotiations. Since the department (or university) will likely want to negotiate downwards, starting with just what you need might leave you after negotiations with a somewhat undersized package.
To borrow from username_1's answer, however, perhaps the single most important component that can help you get the group off the ground is to get as much salary support for additional employees as you can. Having that first postdoc and grad student can make a *huge* difference in a new group.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In many departments, while it might seem like you're negotiating with the department, you're actually negotiating with the dean and the department is really trying to help you. If there's a way to determine this (talk to recently hired faculty at the department), then it changes your strategy, because now your goal in the negotiation is to provide the department with plausible arguments (not iron-clad) for why you need what you need.
There are probably comp bio specific needs you have for which you should consult colleagues who've recently joined other universities, or even any senior mentors you have who sit on the other side of these negotiations. For generic things, username_1's list is great. Just remember that each department at each university has their own customs and things they "usually" give out - you don't have to stick to that, but it's good to know what the baseline is.
Also, it always helps to provide justification (for equipment, student support, postdoc money, and so on). It's a lot harder to argue for salary raises unless the school is private (since public schools often have fixed scales).
Bottom line though: there's no harm in asking as long as you can provide a reason. Definitely ask for all that you need, and let them whittle you down.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I would add to the list of @Steve
* Summer salary
* Duration for which start up capital is good (if you get a grant, you want to be able to keep your startup)
* Lab renovations
* Moving expenses
* Web page design
* Page charges
You want to provide whoever you are negotiating with justification, and ideally quote(s), for everything. In general, they want to give you as good of a startup package as possible.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/05/01 | 933 | 3,955 | <issue_start>username_0: How can I find out what theories are 'widely accepted' in the scientific world at the moment? When I read about a theory, or read a paper, how can I tell what 'the scientific world' thinks of these?
---
### Background:
When hearing about development or history of science, the phrase 'widely accepted' is quite popular. One of the common stories seems to be of some discovery which nobody wanted to believe when published, but a decade or a few later the scientific world came to accept it and it turned into consensus. Prime examples in history would be the heliocentric world view or the theory of evolution.
More recently, I have read 'The Selfish Gene' by <NAME>. He takes every chance to provide evidence that the theory of group selection is unnecessary to explain evolution. The book was published in 1976, when group selection was apparently quite popular. In annotations of the current edition, he gives comments about how the scientific world has now more accepted that group selection is wrong. I asked a question about one of his claims which I did not fully understand (irrelevant here) on Biology.SE and - unexpectedly - promptly got answers by people claiming that group selection was presently very widely accepted.<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, the "official" ways that researchers state their opinion is by stating it in either a publication or in a presentation at a conference. It is from here that we can gain any idea of what *any* researcher thinks about a given topic.1
That being said, the only way to know whether something is "widely accepted" is to be familiar with most of the current (academic) literature on a given topic. Only by really having read the publications of most of the preeminent researchers in a given field can you really get a sense of what the consensus is on that topic. This, of course, requires a lot of time and expertise (and, if you don't have access to a university library with journal subscriptions, money). It took me years as a graduate student to learn what was the consensus about certain topics *within my own field*.
Because of this, anyone can state anything and most people won't know the difference. The easiest way to really determine if it's true is to ask two or three recognized researchers if they agree with the statement of interest. You can do this via email, but they likely won't get back to you. You can ask grad students in their lab and the answer will be that much less reliable, but still close to the source. Beyond that, you'll just have to find experts you can trust and rely on them.
---
1 Obviously, researchers are people like anyone else, and will discuss their pet theories with friends and colleagues over email and in person; it's very hard to quantify these, and you only rarely see this sort of discourse being formally recognized. Occasionally a publication will cite "unpublished discourse", but that's a rare occasion.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Structured review papers can be a very good route into establishing what's the most-widely accepted state of current research.
In health care, the [Cochrane Reviews](http://www.cochrane.org/cochrane-reviews) are a good example.
Some subjects have journals dedicated to such structured reviews, such as [Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews](http://www.journals.elsevier.com/renewable-and-sustainable-energy-reviews/)
Occasionally, a subject is so important that international organisations are set up to establish the state of the art in a current subject: the [International Panel on Climate Change](http://www.ipcc.ch/) is one such example, and this produces a [whole-field review](http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml) every few years. At time of posting this, one (AR5) is being compiled at the moment, for publication in 2013-4. The previous one (AR4) was published in 2007.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/05/01 | 383 | 1,532 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm Muslim, I use Md. as for Muhammad. So when submiting to journals, should I stick to the 2nd & 3rd names? I'm currently facing problems in submitting to arxiv.org which asks for only first and last names.<issue_comment>username_1: My advice is to use at least 3 names (including your surname) so that you will be uniquely identifiable. It probably doesn't matter if you do not use your first name unabbreviated. I know a few researchers whose names are of the form: <NAME>. I also know of researchers who go by a single name (Robby, Arvind). So just fill in whatever names you want , abbreviated or not, into the first names field.
Make sure you use the same configuration of names for your entire career, so that all your papers can be linked to you (I made this mistake).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This shouldn't really be a problem these days in most places, because the entry fields on most web-based entry forms are smart enough to recognize and accept spaces. Thus, even when the site asks for a first name only, you can put in "Md. [Middle Name]" as your first name.
As Dave suggests in the comment, unless you have a really uncommon last name—one that doesn't show up in ISI or arXiv.org searches at all right now, you're better off having parts of three names show up. It's also helpful to keep your professional name fixed throughout your career. (In other words, if you want to go by Md. [Middle] [Last], use that same form whenever possible.)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2012/05/01 | 245 | 944 | <issue_start>username_0: I am interested in teaching at the university-level in Arabic. Would teaching arabic in a high-school first(as I have no university-level teaching experience) help me? I currently teach science to 6th graders, and am considering quitting after 4 years there.
I have an MS in Arabic from UCLA, also an MS in Educ. Bachelors in Arabic also.
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: It is my opinion that unless you have a PhD in Arabic or something intimately related to it you won't get more than a part-time adjunct instructor position. If your goal is to teach some classes without working towards a full appointment, then you might not need the PhD.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Are you a native speaker? If you are not, don't bother.
If you are, try substituting. Teach adult education courses. Military courses. Speak to your own professors for suggestions. You may have to relocate.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/05/01 | 764 | 3,224 | <issue_start>username_0: Some conferences ask for an extended abstract. What are the differences among "abstracts," "extended abstracts," and "full papers?"<issue_comment>username_1: An *abstract* is a preliminary submission that summarizes the contribution of a paper. There are usually strict limits on the length of an abstract, either in terms of words or of total characters (rarely do they exceed 1000 words or 5000 characters; they are often substantially shorter than this.
An *extended abstract* and a *full paper* are nearly the same; the primary difference is that an extended abstract tends to be somewhat shorter than a full paper; I've seen extended abstracts from 2 pages up to 6 pages, while conference papers run from 4 up to about 12 or 15, depending on the space allotted.
One other important difference—outside of computer science, extended abstracts almost never go through a formal peer-review process before being published, while a conference paper will typically have at least one reviewer. (I think this is the case for almost all such papers, but there may be exceptions.)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In computer science conferences, the terms "full paper" and "extended abstract" are often used interchangeably.
For example, STOC calls it an "[extended abstract](http://cs.nyu.edu/~stoc2012/CallForPapers.htm)" while SODA calls it a "[full paper](http://www.siam.org/meetings/da12/submissions.php)". In this case there is no difference that you can infer from the choice of the terminology: they are of the same length (approx. 10 pages + appendix) and they go through a similar peer review process.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Reading the other answers, it is definitely not the case that all disciplines understand the same when speaking about extended abstracts (while they can agree on abstracts and full papers).
In Economics, an extended abstract is something between an abstract and an introduction - being more close to the introduction. That is, it includes the What, the Why and a little bit of the the How, along with references and results. Results are, however, only preliminary, which is why there is only an extended abstract. There are usually no tables nor graphs in it. There are also no chapters.
I believe the Why is the most important part, as it distinguishes your work from the literature and shows what you are going to add.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My view is that in economics an extended abstract is a short version of the paper. Conferences that accept extended abstracts usually expect them to include results, methodology and a short discussion, to be able to gauge the plausibility of findings and appropriateness of the methodology.
In terms of lengths, I'd say 2-6 pages, while a full paper is anything from 15 to 100 pages. So, while very different in terms of length, the main contributions in the paper should be found in the extended abstract.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Just answer from the perspective of whether it will be included in the proceedings, some conferences will be included in the proceedings like regular research, but some won't, you need to confirm it by email.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/05/01 | 829 | 3,642 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a doctoral student and I've published several academic papers. My institution maintains a digital institutional repository, but it doesn't look like I can put copies of my work in it. When I finish my dissertation, a copy of that would go in the IR. It seems strange that the institution doesn't seem to have practices in place to take in other published work of students. Are there other academic institutions that allow this? If so, it would be great to have links to their policies.<issue_comment>username_1: I guess it is not correct for an institution to host the students' works, but Theses, Dissertations, and Technical Reports, in its internal digital library (usually open to externals). The reason is simple, most papers are published under copyright terms. This way, one is not allowed to host this "copyrighted" content, without the publisher permission. I see many departments, research groups, and so on, making public available the list of publications, with a link to the original source.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know how common it is, but certainly some institutions allow student papers. For example, Harvard's repository "provides open access to peer reviewed scholarly articles authored or co-authored by faculty, staff, and students of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences" (<http://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/2>). I can't think of any good reason to exclude students, so I'm puzzled by why a university would do that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Most university institutional repositories will allow students to submit their work, as the aim of an institutional repository is, generally, to capture the scholarly, research and creative output of a university. This would include work being created by faculty, of course, but also staff and students.
What differs between universities is the emphasis they place on different creators. At a large research university, increasing citation counts of faculty members will be a key consideration that may make the acquisition of faculty works a higher priority than student works. Liberal arts colleges will, based on their institutional missions as teaching centres, will be able to focus on undergraduate research on a level that many research universities would be unable to do.
I have recently become the Digital Repository Coordinator at a research university, and one of the challenges I face is trying to balance acquiring faculty and staff work vs. student work. Many of the faculty I have talked to, however, are excited by the potential of using the institutional repository as a way to showcase their students' work.
As a doctoral student, especially, I would assume that you would be able to submit work to your university's institutional repository. Looking at your profile, I believe that your university's repository does allow students to submit work (See <http://digilib.gmu.edu/dspace/handle/1920/2883>, for example). If it's not clear how to do so, contact your university's repository coordinator to make it happen! They'd more than likely be thrilled a student (1) knows what an institutional repository is, and (2) is interested in depositing their work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Have you tried asking your supervisor to deposit the papers? Certainly in the old days there was usually some kind of review process for technical reports which might still be applicable to solely-authored-by-students papers, but I should think that if it is actually published in a journal and/or a member of faculty will vouch for it then the repository should accept it.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/05/02 | 970 | 4,193 | <issue_start>username_0: [OpenWetWare](http://openwetware.org) and [Google Sites](https://sites.google.com/) have been effective strategies in curating lab knowledge. I was curious about what are effective ways to create an effective wiki. Factors include:
* Ease of use and low learning curve
* Speed of sharing and diversity of shared files
* Privacy and protection from sabotage
* Organizational flow
* Legally sharing papers/manuscripts<issue_comment>username_1: A wiki is a platform, which you can use in whatever way you see fit. Personally, I've used them academically for the following purposes:
Lab notebook
------------
I was running cognitive psychology experiments on subjects. I would make a top-level page that contained links to a separate page for all of my research projects. On each research project page, I had links to separate pages for each of the following:
* Study protocols (behavioral testing, brain scanning, data cleaning, data analysis) - separate pages for each
* Change log to the paradigm itself
* Troubleshooting notes... as I encountered problems, write them down here
* Subjects (one page per subject
Each subject page contained notes on each session, results, general info ("subject performed poorly today, possibly due to stress from midterms"), as well as the results of their data analysis.
Publication repository
----------------------
This wiki was basically a place for me to store papers. Many wikis allow embedding of pdfs, and I would store pages as follows. The top-level page segmented topics. Each topic page contained links to pages about individual papers, as well as links to ongoing summaries of my reading. This was where I would write down my thoughts and conclusions after reading papers, and made it easier for me to combine my thoughts on multiple papers... after reading a new article, I would review what I had written there and try to somehow incorporate the new article in my ideas (if relevant, more often than not it wasn't).
---
These are just two ideas, and they were just used by me, not my whole lab. I'm sure you can think of more (managing lab meetings, managing collaborations, managing lab-wide protocols, etc).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In one of the **labs (about a dozen people)** I work with, we use a [MediaWiki](http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki) install given to use by the university that requires log-in to view everything but the front page or to edit. Although the learning curve is not steep (most people already know how to use Wikipedia) it has been hard to convince the undergraduate lab members to use the wiki. It mostly serves as a place for:
* short project summaries (since the lab has many different projects)
* notes/minutes from lab meetings, a place to store slides and presentations, and
* link repository (for instance I maintain a big collection of links to relevant StackExchange questions).
With a former supervisor, we used to have a private MediaWiki install that was used by a our **small group (3 or 4 people)**. Since we worked on theory/math it contained:
* short tutorials on how to do automated calculations as experiments for testing potential theorems (before trying to prove them), and
* collection of special cases that we had calculated by hand.
It was relatively well maintained by the prof, and a pretty good guide for understanding some of the work behind his earlier papers.
I also keep a **personal** private [TiddlyWiki](http://www.tiddlywiki.com/), there I keep:
* notes from papers I've read (although I am slowly moving this over to [Mendeley](http://www.mendeley.com/))
* collections of relevant links from the internet
* a more structured index of the folders and files on my harddrive (through local links) that is easier to navigate and search than my file system directly.
* partial documentation of code and notes on partial results of simulations
* administrative stuff like members of mailing lists, and groups I organize.
For me, the most useful was the private Wiki, the second most useful was the small group wiki because of the good maintenance by my prof, and least useful is the large lab wiki.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2012/05/02 | 553 | 2,386 | <issue_start>username_0: Can a very extroverted person, for example, be more favored than a very quiet person? Or is this not ethical? Can someone who is psychopathic be barred from admission?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, decisions based at least partially on personality do occur. It's not clear to me what the legal technicalities are - for example, depending on your country there may be laws regarding things like discrimination against the mentally ill - but in practice an admissions committee can do whatever it likes, and nobody will be able to prove there was any illegal discrimination.
The way it typically works is that having a particularly pleasant or agreeable personality won't help you, but having an unpleasant personality may hurt you. If you seem likely to be difficult to get along with, rude, disruptive, uncooperative, or otherwise problematic, then that will generally be held against you. (This may be judged based on your personal statement, letters of recommendation, etc.) It won't necessarily doom your chances: some committee members just won't care, and others may be willing to excuse bad behavior if you are sufficiently talented. However, on average it will hurt your chances, sometimes substantially.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Personalities *can* count, because nobody wants to be an environment with lots of boorish colleagues. It's just not very fun.
However, in most cases—at least in the US—admissions are done without interviews. Therefore, the only way the personality of the candidate comes through is through what's written in the application. Either the personal statement or the letters of reference might reveal some details about the personality of the applicant. Usually, though, this is negative; I don't put much stock in letters of reference saying "so-and-so has a pleasant personality," since that is almost a *de rigeur* statement. (Something exceptional that goes into considerable detail, however, is different.)
When you have an interview, however, it's hard to hide your personality for very long. It can make a difference—but generally only if you're a candidate "on the bubble," or if your personality is so polarizing that nobody wants to bother with you, regardless of how nice you are. On the converse, though, I don't think a super-nice personality is enough to get someone on the bubble *in*.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/05/02 | 1,429 | 5,284 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently, I was giving a small informal talk in a local college. The audience comprised of engineers and my talk was based on current research in engineering. One of the girls asked about the position of women in academia. I answered that stating that academia was like just another field for women but now that I think of it, it might not be entirely true.
I thought that perhaps I could refer interested female student to resources explaining any gender specific aspects of academic life. I've read 2 books *"Surviving your Stupid Stupid Decision"* and *"What you came for."* Both were books to read before PhD to discuss common problems and their solutions presented as a preparatory handbook or survival guide. I am looking for something similar, but specifically addressing the aspect of gender in academia. I don't have a specific question in mind. A cursory Amazon search failed to yield any fruitful results.
I'd like to find resources applicable to female students:
1. Engineering in North America but maybe even Europe. These students showed some statistics of bias within academia.
2. Interested in joining faculty positions or industrial labs.
*Are there books, biographies, or survival guides for women in academia?*<issue_comment>username_1: About a month ago, MIT published their most recent [*Report on the Status of Women Faculty in Science and Engineering*](http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/images/documents/women-report-2011.pdf), following up on previous reports from 1999 and 2002. It's not exactly a "survival guide"—it's written for existing faculty and administrators more than for prospective academics—but it does clearly describe several barriers to gender inequality, both past and present. The National Academies published a [similar report](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9813/) in 2006.
Even more recently, <NAME> (one of the authors of the MIT reports) gave [a fascinating talk](http://techtv.mit.edu/tags/124-science/videos/12205-keynote-the-status-of-women-in-science-and-engineering-at-mit-) about MIT's efforts to attract and retain female faculty.
(Hopefully someone else will suggest something more useful for prospective academics.)
---
**Update:** One of my female colleagues sent me the following reply, which I'm posting with her permission. (I'll delete this update if she decides to post an answer herself.)
>
> My more recent reading has focused more on survival with children in
> academia, which is not quite the same thing. However, some of the
> issues might be the same. Two good books are [*Mama,
> PhD*](http://www.mamaphd.com/) and [*Motherhood: the Elephant in the
> Library*](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0801446643),
> both of which are essay-based, with women sharing their stories. Both
> are available on Amazon, and are quite good.
>
>
> Some of the best survival guides these days are the blogs - there are
> a bunch of good ones which provided sanity and good advice along the
> way. My two favorite aren't active anymore, but their archives are
> nice, and there are plenty of good ones still active:
>
>
> * <http://scienceblogs.com/sciencewoman/>
> * <http://scienceblogs.com/seejanecompute/>
> * <http://science-professor.blogspot.com/>
>
>
> There are tons of research papers on the issue, but to be honest, at
> least for me, those tend to be more depressing than helpful. For
> example, an interesting (but outdated) one:
> <http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/EKNU.html> There was a recent
> article that retention is going better among faculty (except in math,
> which surprised me):
> <http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6070/864.abstract>
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Here are two blogs that academics might enjoy:
* [Female Computer Scientist](http://femalecomputerscientist.blogspot.com/) - Especially, read the archives, starting from the beginning and moving forward, for a perspective from a graduate student who later went on to a professor position. Lots of great advice for men and women alike.
* [Female Science Professor](http://science-professor.blogspot.com/) - Worth reading, and with a sense of humor. Written from the perspective of a mid-career science professor. Probably more likely to be of interest to faculty than grad students, but for faculty, you may find some of her writing spot-on.
I certainly found some of the stuff there helpful. I don't know if it will help women in the position you mentioned, except perhaps to feel a sense that others have gone through this and that it is possible to remain a sane, productive person despite the hurdles.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: What advice would you give men wanting to do the same things?
That advice that you would give them, you give to women.
It'd be quite foolish to give women different advice and expect them to have realistic expectations and not set them up to fail, unless you feel that women aren't as competent and need to have their hands held, which would be wildly sexist.
Chances are high that if you direct them to a source that's "for women," it will more than likely ensure a negative outlook about their future coworkers and employment.
Engineering is engineering. Gender need not apply.
Upvotes: -1 |
2011/10/15 | 944 | 4,091 | <issue_start>username_0: Like most fields that rely on statistical analyses, economics has suffered from a few well-publicized coding errors (most notably the Foote and Goetz finding that when correcting Donohue and Levitt's programming error in the abortion/crime paper the conclusion is reversed), and likely suffers from far more which are never discovered.
What solutions have other fields used to ameliorate this problem, and how might the incentives of researchers be changed to encourage them to submit to these changes?<issue_comment>username_1: **Warning - anecdotal evidence ahead:**
We have a couple of pet statisticians that we run things past: they review our statistical methodology, and can check that the code does what we think it's doing. (That is to say, we borrow a few hours of time from colleagues in other departments. And in some funding bids / project proposals, we explicitly put in time for them). In some cases, we've coded up algorithms in different languages, and checked that results have been reproduced.
The incentives for cross-disciplinary collaboration are, I believe, already there. When we've explained to our statisticians what we're trying to do, for a stats health check, they've often been able to suggest additional tests. And they love getting their paws on new datasets, to go mining on. So it's constructive for all parties.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You need the journals...
Nothing will move without it. The American Economics Review has taken the lead in requiring all data papers to make their data and source code available. Unfortunately, there's no real indication that other journals will follow suit, despite the formidable reputation of AER. Sadly, even the AER doesn't have a clear repository and not all code is available even though they require it of the authors.
Beyond that, <NAME> has a nice repository of sorts for structural econometrics data. <NAME> and David Autor should be praised for creating Data Archives that document their own work. But at this point it's still up to individuals to make their research transparent and their code available.
For what it's worth, I've been thinking about this issue a lot lately and decided to create a Google Code Project where economists can upload their code:
<http://code.google.com/p/econ-code/> ... That said, I have not yet tried to publicize it and think the ultimate key to adoption lies with the journals.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Another approach is to ease the process of making your data/code open. The [Center for Open Science](http://centerforopenscience.org/) is an interesting non-profit that started this year. They're developing [The Open Science Framework](https://openscienceframework.org/), which is a tool meant to assist with the research workflow--it facilitates collaboration, version control, and it reduces making your data/code open (completely or in parts) to a single click. I guess the strategy is to lure researchers into using the software by making a useful tool, and hoping that if openness is only a click away, more of them will just click the button. I could see this or something like it making a real impact.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with dchandler. The journals have to require it and publicize it on their websites. There is no other way. There is another example from <NAME> of Freakonomics fame in which a paper had erroneous conclusions that were demonstrated by trying to replicate the results. This is a serious issue that needs attention. Scientific rigor goes as far as the academic rigor, but academics have regrettably, large incentives to "make mistakes" in their coding to obtain conclusions beneficial to their research programme. There hardly is a more pressing issue in academic research than making the research process public. Technically it is a breeze to do, what is required is the political will for the journals to implement it. Hopefully, the issue can be raised in future annual meetings of the corresponding associations.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/05/02 | 701 | 2,759 | <issue_start>username_0: I just got my Ph.D and I'm trying to work out how to do the *full* series of abbreviations after my name.
My scholastic qualifications are:
* Ph.D University of New South Wales, Philosophy
* Masters of Science, Rochester Institute of Technology, Information Technology
* Bachelors of Science, RIT, Information Technology
+ RIT Scholar (University Medal)
+ Highest Honors.
Given that I have both American and Australian degrees, what series of abbreviations is appropriate to put after my name?<issue_comment>username_1: As far as I know, once you pursue a Ph.D. you are encouraged to put only that achievement right after your name, since it is more relevant that everything else. I maybe wrong, but it's what I've seen for years.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This varies between countries. My impression is that listing titles after the name is more common in the UK and Australia, and there may be fixed conventions as to the ordering, but I can't address that. What I can deal with is the U.S., and my advice in that context is simple: don't do it. In the U.S., if you list one title ("<NAME>, Ph.D."), you'll look a little pompous and like you are overemphasizing your degree (leading to questions like "Gee, is that Ph.D. still his proudest achievement?" or "Does he worry people will think he didn't get a Ph.D.?"), and if you list more than one it will look ridiculous. In particular, don't list titles after your name in academic job applications, CVs, signatures for letters of recommendation, etc. that are being sent to the U.S. Of course, conventions in other countries may be different.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Even in countries like Germany, where titles get stacked up, only your highest degree *in a given field* is listed. However, in your case, you have two different degrees in very different areas, so it might be helpful to list both the master's and the doctorate in your title. However, the bachelor's is superseded by the master's, so it doesn't appear in any case.
But beyond that, I think it's a function of context: whichever degree is most important for you in the situation should be right after your name, and then the other degree. If it's a IT-related issue, then the MSc is probably more important than the PhD; the PhD matters for philosophy-related stuff.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You absolutely list your credentials. ALWAYS! In the U.S., list the highest one in each field. In the EU, it's more common to list them all.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: It depends on local custom. Around here (Chile) titles are rarely used at all. In neighbouring countries it is extremely rude not to address somebody by degree, including bachelor.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/05/03 | 1,000 | 4,236 | <issue_start>username_0: [Past advice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/925/767) suggests that potential PhD students should be wary of attending schools with only one professor in their subfield. If you have problems with your advisor and want to switch, having that option would be invaluable.
But what if your subfield is not represented that well in the vast majority of departments? Almost all schools I'm considering applying for only have one professor in my intended research area. I'm a MS student at the moment and I'm sure what general subfield I'd like to do my PhD research in.
Should I just accept that this is how things are and try to check whether a professor and I would be good matches before accepting? Or should this make the few schools with more than one professor in this subfield more attractive? To be clear, every school I will apply to will have top researchers in this subfield. The comparison is more between a school with one top researcher and one newer researcher and another school with one top researcher and no one else in the subfield. The majority of schools are in the latter group.
I'm tempted to think that hiring committees avoid hiring additional faculty in my subfield if they already have one professor doing research in the area. They have their token professor and that's enough for them. Never mind that the professor's personality, perspective, and research methods matter!<issue_comment>username_1: It sounds like this subarea might be somewhat marginalized in the larger area the department represents, and this is consistent across universities. Why is that ? is the subarea not particularly popular, or interesting, or does it lack the ability to get funding ? In all these case, you do have to ask yourself whether the risk of getting into such an area is worth it.
But on the more direct question of whether you should favor the few schools that have more than one professor, the right question is: what are you planning to do after a Ph.D ? And in what way can this professor (or professors) help with that goal ? If you want to go into academia (say), are these professors the dominant players in the area ? and so on.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, having other professors in your subfield is a benefit. You and your advisor might have a falling out, or some freak tragedy could befall your advisor, or your advisor might leave for a job elsewhere and not get you an adequate (or any) offer to bring you.
But that doesn't make it an absolute necessity, since there are plenty of other really important things to consider. You should consider it a plus at the institutions that have two, but only you can evaluate how big a plus.
You should also think about ways to mitigate the problem at other places. For instance, there might be people in related areas, even if not your exact subfield, who are close enough to potentially supervise you, especially if they're switching in half-way through your PhD. Or there might be other faculty in the area near-by, at other schools in easy reach, who might at least be able to help out if something happens.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As the author of the [original answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/925/767), I suppose some further clarification is appropriate. The issues are:
1. Are you willing to work on a topic outside of your intended subfield?
2. Does your program assign students directly to a research supervisor at the time of admission?
If the answer to *both* questions is "no," then you have a potential problem on your hands, and then you should be very cautious. However, if you are willing to move outside your intended subfield if there are no positions available, or if you're guaranteed entry to the desired research group at the time, it's not nearly as serious a situation.
That said, if you only want to stay in your subfield, and it's only represented by one faculty at most institutions, then you'll need to do due diligence and figure out who will be the best fit for you, both in terms of research but in terms of "fit." A significant concern would then be: "Whose advising and supervision style best meshes with my own preferences?"
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2012/05/03 | 716 | 2,838 | <issue_start>username_0: Or in <NAME>'s words, is it true that "you are better off if your hobbies are nothing like your work"?
>
> Carroll, Sean. ["How To Get Tenure at a Major Research University:
> Cosmic Variance."](http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2011/03/30/how-to-get-tenure-at-a-major-research-university/) Cosmic Variance. N.p., 30 Mar. 2011. Web. 09 Oct. 2014.
>
>
>
This question applies for both cases of tenure and cases of applying for academic positions.<issue_comment>username_1: I suspect <NAME> is emphasizing this more than most people would, thanks to his tenure denial. It's not always important - plenty of serious bloggers have received tenure, and I know of one mathematician who published a novel before successfully getting tenure at a serious research university. However, Carroll's right about the risks: it will hurt your chances if people spend too much time comparing what you did accomplish to what they imagine you might have accomplished if you had focused more. If your hobbies could be viewed as taking time away from research, then it gives anyone who doesn't want you to get tenure an excellent opportunity to try to derail your case.
So basically, if your tenure case could be viewed as marginal or you might have enemies in the department (or among your letter writers), then you should worry about this. Otherwise, I wouldn't let it dictate your life, but I guess it depends on your tolerance for risk. One common-sense approach is not to go around emphasizing to colleagues how much time you are spending on hobbies.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Work-life balance is important. The years until you get tenure are very stress-filled. You need something to balance out work -- whether that's your family or whether it's doing some underwater basket weaving.
That being said, you also do not want to give the impression that you are slouching off or not anything than fully dedicated to your work.
So at least until you get tenure, I would recommend having a hobby in order to maintain your sanity but not talking about it at work and keeping a low social-network profile.
At my previous job, I was an avid woodworker with an entire woodshop in my basement. It helped keep my head on and provided a social sphere entirely separate from school.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It definitely depends on the one who reads your CV. Those who don't care about hobbies will simply scroll this lines about hobbies. Those who care will decide based on their own opinion.
Also it is nice when it will be possible to do your hobbies at the University you apply to. E.g. "sailing" in the middle of continent would look stupid, but same "sailing" in some seaside city can make sense and add another reason why you would like to work there.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/05/03 | 1,968 | 8,515 | <issue_start>username_0: One of the major issues in universities with respect to PhD is the high dropout factor. Demotivated students cause a big loss to the university - a lot is spent on assistantships, but in the end, the students quit without making any meaningful contribution.
What steps do/should universities and faculty members take to reduce alarming drop-out rates? One step is obviously to choose the right person for the job, which we expect the admissions committee to do anyway. PhD involves years of wading through uncertainty and possibly it is in these years that students get distracted and unfocused. How should universities ensure the students remain unwavering in their efforts during these uncertain years?<issue_comment>username_1: One difficulty is that it's far from clear what the ideal dropout rate should be. Probably not zero, for two reasons:
1. Even the best students sometimes find that their interests change over time, in ways nobody could have predicted. Dropping out may become a quite sensible choice, in which case it's harmful for the university to discourage it.
2. It's reasonable for a university to give someone a chance even if it's not certain that they will succeed. The only way to get a really low drop-out rate is to admit just the applicants that are obviously destined for success. The top few schools can get away with this, but if everyone tried it, then many talented candidates would be shut out from graduate school.
So some attrition is OK, and some is bad but may be a necessary consequence of policies that are on the whole good. The question then becomes how you distinguish these kinds from needless and damaging attrition, and then how you minimize that kind.
Advisors play a key role here, because some are much better than others at being supportive or motivational. However, at least in mathematics, most advisors don't supervise very many students, so the numbers often aren't large enough to see patterns clearly.
I'm sure people have studied this problem, and perhaps identified best practices for addressing it. However, in my experience any studies or solutions are not especially influential (at least in the few math departments I've been in). Most discussions are at the stage of trying to figure out whether there is a real problem and if so why, rather than what to do about it.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that the problem is that often many professors underestimate the PhD student's will and personal scientific aims.
Often it happens that a perspective PhD student apply for PhD admission to work on a project X, and then, once he/she starts the doctorate program, professors say to him or her "Surely you will work on X some day, but now you have to work on Y".
But, effectively, that "some day" never arrives. So the PhD student looses motivations, gets sick, and finally quits...
To answer the question, I would sat that PhD student supervisors should take more care of the PhD student will and expectations, and understand that letting him/her work on the topic he/she prefers will make him/her more motivated and finally get better results than working on someone's else objectives.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think this is asking the wrong question. To me, the right question is, *what are the main reasons that students drop out, and what steps can be taken to address those reasons?* To properly examine this data would need to be gathered, but anecdotally I can think of a few reasons:
* **Student gets bored/loses interest/experiences major life changes (marriage, death in family, midlife crisis, etc.)**. This will happen in any profession, and are essentially unavoidable. It can be mitigated somewhat by stressing at the outset the time commitment necessary to complete a PhD, but that can only do so much... a lot can happen in four (or five, or six, or...) years.
* **Student has major fallout with advisor**. Again, this happens in every profession... people have personality conflicts with their bosses all the time. Communication, and lots of it, is often cited as the best tonic for this problem.
* **Students become disillusioned with academia**. This problem often manifests later on in the career, as papers are rejected, grant applications are rejected, and/or the student has difficulty with his or her research. I would venture that this is simultaneously the most treatable problem and the most difficult to treat correctly; the advisor has to work very closely with the student and give them good academic and professional advice. From my experience, the success of the advisor in this task is often the main factor in whether the student remains in academia.
There are likely other reasons students drop out; if I think of more I'll add them, and please list others in the comments.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Possibly universities should be more careful about hiring PhD students in the first place. It's not enough that they are smart. Students need to be persistent and motivated and their motivations should be realistic. I think it helps a lot of if the students have had some time out of academia so they know early whether this really is what they want to do with their time. I've seen a lot of faculty try to talk smart students into staying when if anything we should be trying to talk them out of staying to make sure they really want to be here. (And "staying" is a bad idea anyway, it's better to change institution so it really does feel like you aren't at school anymore, because a PhD is a **lot** different from a college degree.)
I think the worst thing is students that hang around forever neither quitting nor working hard. It is the student's life and career and time, and they need to take it in hand and change supervisor if they need to, or change project, or leave. But wasting everyone's time including their own is almost criminal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: As a person who dropped out from a part-time PhD programme in Engineering in the UK. I can add my reasons for dropping out.
1. Family - being a father and husband changes worldview and sometimes it becomes apparent that there are more effective ways to further one's career than PhD if your aim is not to be an academic. But a university can't do much about this
2. Lack of proper academic knowledge in the area of PhD project. For example my professional experience and academic background was in electronics, audio and acoustical engineering whereas PhD turned out to be be essentially a theoretical physics. Any physics bachelor would have easier time than me.
3. Supervisor is not an expert in the area of PhD project. Especially difficult if also the situation in point 2. is present. The lack of appropriate guidance in this case is harmful.
4. The experimental part is not within control of your department/unit in my case it was not possible to just pop down to the lab to do experiments. It was a cross faculty project and it was difficult to communicate with the other people from outside you faculty
5. Lack of community support. As a part time student it was difficult to have other PhD students available as you colleagues. Also the project was so removed from anything that the other PhD student were doing so it was quite alienating project.
6. If your goal is just to further your knowledge it actually may not be the best way to do it. As rigour required to prove your method would steal your learning time.
7. Topic, it is true that even if you love the topic you will hate, but is also true you can grow into the topic and will start be passionate about it. But if your project has no purpose to you it will be extremely difficult to finish. You need to believe in it. In this case supervisor should at the beginning talk about possible applications or importance of the problem. But there is only so much they can do.
I need to add that the University and my supervisors were really helpful and nice, but the hurdles were just too much for me.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Pay, if you paid me what I would make working on an industry project I would have been a lot more compelled to stay.
At the moment, even looking purely at GRA hourly rate it's almost half the hourly rate of a junior engineer. The way current PhD system works is basically projects get subcontracted out to universities who then pay the people involved a fraction of their real worth in hopes of getting a degree afterwards.
Upvotes: 2 |
2011/11/07 | 745 | 2,945 | <issue_start>username_0: After factoring in government subsidies (or lack thereof), is the **total price** for one year of undergraduate education in Europe increasing at a rate similar to America?<issue_comment>username_1: This answer is based on the situation in Sweden, I think similar principles would apply in the Nordic countries and possibly in north Europe.
First cost of education is very low compared to US, as can be seen in the following references:
[Sweden Abroad's paper on education costs in Sweden](http://www.swedenabroad.com/SelectImageX/165193/Funding-the-swedish-school-system-080403[1].pdf "Link to educational costs in Sweden")
[Higher Education Finance and Cost-Sharing in Sweden](http://gse.buffalo.edu/org/inthigheredfinance/files/Country_Profiles/Europe/Sweden.pdf)
There are no tuition fees for European citizens (non Europeans pay a tuition fee which varies based on the University and the Education. For example a technical education for a non European may cost in the range of US$12000/year. The government also provides a grant and a loan on favourable conditions. Everyone who wants to study can get a seat.
It could be argued that even when the government subsidies something there is still a real price, and if there is a real market driver the price should go up.
The government provides resources to a University based on the number of students and the number of courses provided. The amount differs based on the course. For example for natural science and technology the amount is higher than for social sciences. Half the amount is given when the student signs up for a course and half when he or she passes the course. Since the government provides means based on the number of students, there is no reason for why supply and demand should not be met and there should not be any price driver as in US.
For certain very popular educations there are limited seats, and the college would then limit access to these seats based on scores. But money is still not the driver.
For commercial education such as a professional MBA at Stockholm School of Economics there are market price and there prices have increased dramatically over the years. The current cost is in the range of SEK 500K.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In the UK universities have received about £10,000 (15,000 USD) in tuition and fees per student per year. This has been pretty constant with small increases over the years. Students who are not part of the EU are expected to pay the fees in their entirety "up front". EU students who are not part of the UK pay £6000 a year up front. For UK students the rules vary amongst Scotland, Wales, and England. In Scotland university is free for Scots. I am not sure how much, if anything other Brits pay. In England, the fees just rose from £4000 to £9000. Students don't have to pay until after they graduate and begin making more than £25,000 a year.
Upvotes: 3 |
2011/10/24 | 754 | 2,972 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm studying published journal articles on my topic, and I'd like to reproduce their analysis. How can I get a copy of their dataset and enough specifications to reproduce their numerical results?
In my specific case, I'm studying [this work: Stecklov et al. (2005)](https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2005.0037), published in *Demography*, and they're using PROGRESA datasets which are [publicly available](http://evaluacion.oportunidades.gob.mx:8010/es/eval_cuant/bases_cuanti.php), but when I try to reproduce their results, all the base statistics are off by a bit, and the regressions come out a bit different. Probably I'm just including or excluding a few different cases, but what can I do to identify the difference?<issue_comment>username_1: Read carefully, underline everything it says about anything to do with the data, but it is likely you won't get it quite right. For Labor we were assigned to reproduce "[Tax Incentives and the Decision to Purchase Health Insurance: Evidence from the Self-Employed](http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2118419)" by <NAME> and <NAME> (QJE, 1994) and "[Children and Their Parents' Labor Supply: Evidence from Exogenous Variation in Family Size](http://www.jstor.org/stable/116844)" by <NAME> and <NAME> (AER, 1998). Try as we might, no one in the class ever got exactly the same things as in the papers. It was always about right, and enough people did it independently that we trusted we were doing the right thing. After a while the small differences stopped bothering my classmates and I.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Email the author nominated for communications, and ask them for a copy of their dataset and enough specifications to reproduce their numeric results. As a backstop, ask for the specific criteria they used to exclude cases. Consider offering co-authorship on any papers that will result from your analysis, as incentive. Give them enough context about you & your own work, so that they know your enquiry is serious, and that you're looking to constructively build on their work, (and not to stitch them up!)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Replication is an incredibly important part of academia. Don't forget that it's possible you are failing to replicate because the original authors did something wrong! You should absolutely email them, but keep in mind that failure to replicate can be publishable, provided your differences are significant and you can couch couch our results in current theory.
Have a look at Gary King's "[Replication, Replication](http://gking.harvard.edu/files/abs/replication-abs.shtml)"
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My first thought is that you may ask help in support team where this dataset is placed. Also, you may ask and find out what is wrong with the author. Some data may not be available or partially shown, although access is open. Perhaps this was done for reasons of plagiarism.
Upvotes: -1 |
2012/05/04 | 1,244 | 5,523 | <issue_start>username_0: After graduating high-school, I did not attend a university and instead decided to enter the work force. Eight years hence, I would like to pursue a university degree but I am not entirely sure which credentials are important for an adult freshman. Are my high-school transcripts still relevant almost a decade after the fact? Do universities consider professional experience in their admissions process (I have 6 years professional experience related to my intended field of study)? Do I have a shot at competitive university even though my academic history is essentially nothing? With sufficient review, I expect I can achieve high standardized testing scores, but I wonder if that will be enough to compensate for such a huge gap in my academic career.
The crux of my question is: how should an adult freshmen prepare before applying to a competitive university?<issue_comment>username_1: I would say definitely - it's worth a try. I am studying at a university that usually ends up high in rankings (although it dropped quite a bit now because of student feedback), the oldest person in my course is about 9 years older than the rest of us. He spent around 5 years after school working (he had already worked there during school) and then two years ago took some additional courses at an adults' school and applied here. What should I say, they happily took him and he's constantly getting the best grades in the year.
As you mention that you have professional experience related to the subject, I think you may find it interesting that his years of work were completely unrelated to the subject he is studying now. I think that's a good factor as well.
I think in such a situation I would put much more stress on what I have done *since* school rather than what I achieved at school. With such a long gap, what happened at school should be practically irrelevant unless you can demonstrate what strengths you have taken from school that you still maintain today. This should go by the same reasons for which certificates such as IELTS or TOEFL are not accepted more than two years after getting them.
Finally I should add that this is a UK university. Procedures in the USA may of course be very different and so may your chances - but in any case it's worth a shot. It can't get much worse than having your application rejected can it?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Universities take all sorts of information into consideration when they take in undergraduates (or postgradautes). Essays, recommendations, your CV (your experience) all matter. For a mature student, your high school record will normally matter somewhat, but it will almost certainly not be weighted as highly as it would for a person with no other experience or evidence of their quality of work.
Different universities have different strategies and requirements, and you should check into those of the one you are interested in. For example, when I was working in Chicago I took night classes from one of the local universities, I think it was Northwestern although the classes were at Roosevelt. At the time at least, they would let anyone sign up for up to four undergraduate classes, no questions asked. Then after four classes you were called in to consider really registering for your degree, and that was done almost entirely on the basis of your four classes. I actually already had a degree, but I remember being incredibly impressed with the system, it seemed immensely sensible and fair.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My answer is going to be anecdotal. One of my good friends in university right now is a senior (graduating next semester). He was a professional musician and learnt a trade as an apprentice for many years (I think about 7 years). Then he went to community college for 2 years and transferred to my current university as a sophomore. He has distinguished himself very well and has been an undergraduate research assistant for the last 3 semesters. In fact, now he wants a PhD and is doing all that he can to get into the best school that he can.
Therefore, ***anecdotally,*** I can tell you that prepare the best you can ; perhaps by even going to community college (its cheap !) and taking relevant courses and then either applying as a freshman or sophomore to the university you really want to go to. I think that (as others have pointed out), your experiences will serve you in good stead.
**PS:** This is in context to the USA
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Ask the university.
I went to college for one year after high school, then enrolled in a different university several years later (which I completed; both in the U.S.). My second university used my high school transcript and test scores from when I was in high school (I had to pay an extra fee to retrieve my old scores), as well as my transcript from my previous year of college (even though only one class actually counted for anything). They did not consider any professional experience.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: It varies from college to college. Some make a point of being "returning student" friendly while others don't. Your best bet is likely to look into the ones you are interested and call up the admissions office. You might be surprised. One of my former colleges made a huge point of being returning student friendly, and it was a great idea because they were often amongst the best students in the class because they knew the importance of hard work and study.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/05/05 | 1,509 | 6,546 | <issue_start>username_0: What are the advantages and disadvantages of doing your PhD research (in science, math, or engineering) at a non-academic lab (like a government or industrial lab) vs. the traditional academic setting? (Of course, the degree is granted by a university.)
When is one option better than the other if you have the choice between doing your research in an academic or non-academic setting?
A few potential advantages I can think of:
* You're likely to be hired by the lab after graduation. If you don't want to enter academia and are happy with the lab, this could be your career. If you do want to enter academia, often you're in good company because leaving research labs for academia isn't uncommon.
* You can work with more people (your school's students and professors and the lab's researchers). This'll expand your professional network and expose you to different perspectives.
* Your affiliation with the lab could add some credibility to you and your research.
A few potential disadvantages:
* Travel could be problematic if your school and your lab aren't close. This could be mitigated by taking care of the coursework first.
* The research topic is often dictated by someone in the lab if you are funded by them. If you decide this topic is not worth researching or not interesting then you might have a problem. Politics in the lab could change the research topic in the future and that might also be a problem.<issue_comment>username_1: Since a Ph.D is always granted through some kind of Ph.D granting institution (usually a university) I assume your question is about being **funded** by a research laboratory while being formally affiliated with a university ?
As with most things, it depends on the context. First of all, I wouldn't be so sure that a permanent job is guaranteed. Unless you have an explicit letter in writing saying so, nothing is set in stone. Secondly, I'd worry about your potential future marketability in the event that you **do** have to look for a job elsewhere. Again, whether this is an issue depends on the specific context of your arrangement. Finally, your last "pro" about working with students AND researchers may not be true unless the lab and university are relatively close to each other. There's also the risk of your advisor tuning you out, unless there's already a structure of collaboration in place.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Throughout graduate school I worked at and was funded by a university-run laboratory that operated somewhat like a government laboratory and was largely funded for applied research. I now work at a [UARC](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_Affiliated_Research_Center) (which is similar to an [FFRDC](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federally_Funded_Research_and_Development_Center)). Given that my graduate school lab was already affiliated with the University, though, my situation is slightly different than yours.
At least in the US, it is relatively hard for non-academic laboratories to find funding for basic research; funding agencies like the NSF have a prejudice toward funding degree-granting institutions. Therefore, in my experience, much of the flavor of the funding at non-academic laboratories is geared toward applied research. This might not be a problem, but it can be a challenge to find a deep, Ph.D.-level problem to solve when your sponsors are interested in seeing more concrete results.
In my case, working at an applied research laboratory to fund my graduate degrees was actually somewhat of a benefit. Due to the reasons I listed above, it was difficult for me to latch onto a deep problem to solve for which there was stable, direct funding. Therefore, I used my position at the laboratory to basically "pay the bills" (it covered my stipend, tuition remission, *&c.*). That gave me the freedom to work on related—but not directly funded—problems that interested me. This of course had the overhead of essentially working two jobs at once, but it had the added benefit of providing visibility to my "side" research to the sponsors who were funding my "pay the bills" research. It also paid for my trips to relevant conferences, at which I was able to present *both* flavors of my research.
Now that I am working at a UARC, I see others here who are also pursuing part-time Ph.D.s. Most of them seem to have found a similar model to mine: They use their position at the non-academic lab to "pay the bills", and then focus their actual research on a related but independent problem. If you are able to fund yourself (*i.e.*, if your Ph.D. advisor doesn't have to worry about finding funding for you), then many advisors will be willing to take you on as a student.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I am currently doing basically this in the UK. I can definitely say it is a viable option, although there are definitely some drawbacks.
The biggest disadvantage is that you lack lots of the support the being based at a academic institution has. There is no student union or similar structures to support you. While you will have access to these facilities via your academic institution they are generally much harder to access due to your physical separation.
Similarly the social life at non-academic institutions is very different. Most of your colleges will not be students and probably have a very different outlook on life, e.g. many more older people with families. Similarly there is no union, clubs or other formalised ways to meet people socially. Although this probably depends more your personality and the specific place your at.
You are also correct that travel to/from your academic institution can be very annoying. For meeting with your supervisor I strongly recommend trying to do as much by skype as possible.
Finally non-academic institutions, even government labs/NMIs tend to be less research focused and more focused on providing a service/developing a product, which might involve significant research. This isn't necessarily a problem as long as your project is well defined and your not at risk of doing several small unrelated projects.
On the plus side, you will probably be more exposed to industry and get a wider understanding of what is viewed as important by end users.
Many of the researchers at these labs are world-leading in there own right and some labs are very highly regarded which can't hurt your future prospects.
Also, they are presumably providing funding for the project. Which is always import to have :).
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/05/05 | 706 | 2,888 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently enrolled as a first year student doing a computing related degree (my first) at the University of London (distance learning). Since I started, there has been a massive shifts in online education with a particular focus on the direction I want to take (computer science). With the exception to access to a wide-range of journals and digital libraries, the quality of the materials provided by the university are far eclipsed by those offered by sites such as Udacity and Coursera, plus there is no where near the same level of interaction among students or even lecturers for that matter.
Essentially, I feel like I am paying for a piece of paper and nothing more. I'm given a guide as to what is on the paper but I'm essentially on my own. I've spent all my savings so far on this, but would need to take a loan for next year. I'm both a mature student (28) and living in a foreign country, therefore the traditional paths were not open to me.
Is it worth it? Should I just invest the time pursuing the free courses and hope that It does not impact my employ-ability?<issue_comment>username_1: Basically, is your question is "Is it worth it to enroll in distance learning when you could do the same attending free online lectures?" I believe you can have some good input from [Looking for sources of online graduate-level education](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/603/102) and [Does one get academic credit towards a degree for open online courses?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/1317/102).
The bottom line is: online lectures usually don't provide academic credits. So you can't show an official degree to an employer, so it depends on the kind of job you want to do: if it's enough to show what you can do (say, for instance, you want to be a web-designer, then your portfolio is likely to be more important than your degree), then why not. But otherwise, you might have to stick with the distance learning.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's true that most MOOCs these days provide more interaction than typical courses in the UoL external program (I've done both). However, you cannot get academic credit for a MOOC (except in some very limited cases - introductory courses, and the like). A UoL degree will be recognized as an accredited degree. Ironically, the emergence of MOOCs has, perhaps, made accredited degrees more valuable, as they distinguish you from MOOCs.
Your same question could be re-framed to include MOOCs vs. brick and mortar schools: Why am I paying a lot of money to sit in a classroom and listen to a professor when I can get a simulated version in a MOOC? Again, I think the answer boils down to academic credit. If you want the degree, you'll have to go the "traditional" route, where traditional, in this case, means traditional distance learning, or traditional brick and mortar.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/05/05 | 1,691 | 6,910 | <issue_start>username_0: When writing a thesis, is it acceptable practice to cite only the URL of referenced research papers where they are published electronically? Or is it compulsory to give proper authors, title, year of publication, etc... information?
Example:
>
> Data mining is the process of analyzing large data sets in order to discover hidden patterns within these data sets.[1] Stock market prices do not follow random walk.[2]
>
>
> [1] <http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=5FIEAwyn9aoC>
>
>
> [2] <http://rfs.oxfordjournals.org/content/1/1/41.short>
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Because URL are (usually) not eternal, but hopefully your publication is, then I wouldn't advise to only put an URL, especially for books or paper. It doesn't add much to make a full biblio item, that can of course include the URL!
Note that [Bibtex](http://www.bibtex.org/) has a special field for url, but you can also add it as a note.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: No, it's not OK to cite URLs because firstly, you are citing ONLY the URL! The URL could change at any given time without notice. Also, you are assuming that everyone is reading your paper electronically and has access to the internet.
You NEED to give the name of the paper, the author(s), the Journal it was published in and the year it was published.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Absolutely not! The other answers mention impermanence of URLs, which is an issue, but not, I think, the most important one. The most important reason is that some of the information in a citation, especially the author and year of publication, is important context for interpreting a citation, and is therefore essential content to the paper itself.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: URL sources are a grey area. When possible, cite the original source. For example if you are citing books.google.\* , then you need to cite that book as a book and not a URL. For academic publications, there is an OPTIONAL URL field you may use, but this should be in addition to citing the original conference/journal/workshop/etc.
There are circumstances where a URL is the best identifier of the resource, and in those cases, you'll have to cite the URL. For example, I used a URL resource from the libary of congress because it was unpublished historical (circa 1890AD) blueprints scanned into their library.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The MLA Style guide (via [Indiana University](http://www.indiana.edu/~libugls/Publications/electronic_mla.html)) says the following:
>
> World Wide Web Sites:
>
>
> There are many different kinds of web sites, so it is impossible to give just one set of precise instructions for citation format. If you can not find some of the information needed, cite what is available. The following Works Cited/Bibliography examples are only guidelines; utilize the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers for additional examples.
>
>
> What you need (at minimum):
>
>
>
> ```
> Site title (if there is no title use a description such as "Home Page")
> Date you accessed the information
> URL
>
> ```
>
> What you need (if available):
>
>
>
> ```
> Author(s)/Editor(s) name
> Publication or last update date
> Organization/Institution name associated with the site
>
> ```
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The point of a bibliography is not only to identify your sources, but to allow your readers to read those sources themselves, at some indefinite time in the future. Bare URLs rarely serve that function, in part because URLs are (by design) transient, and in part because **you cannot assume that your unknown future reader will have internet access.** This is the same reason why citations should still include page numbers, even though a quick Google search on the title and authors almost always finds the paper.
On the other hand, books go out of print, library subscriptions lapse, some conference proceedings are only distributed online, some papers are still preprints, and sometimes the source in question is a blog, a usenet post, a source code repository, or a StackExchange question. For sources without permanent reliable offline access, I think you **must** include a URL in your bibliography, despite its transience, in addition to as much traditional identifying information (authors, title, journal/conference/book title, page numbers, date) as possible.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: For everything that have been reviewed AND permanently archived then the bibliography is fine. For all the rest footnotes are the place to be.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: (I think:) *Definitely* give a URL if there is one, *with* the date you down/up-loaded the paper, and perhaps give a revision date of the paper, if it itself gives one.
*AND* give the more traditional reference information as well.
The URL allows people to find an e-copy, at least for a while. The conventional references do not necessarily produce copies accessible through the internet, though sometimes they do.
For the time being, these two sorts of citations give different information, have different utilities. One may take the pose that one makes the other irrelevant, but I think this is not accurate. The common "objections" to internet-accessible things, that they are "transient", while physical references are "permanent", is disingenuous, upon some thought. First, many good things are transient, which is not an argument against them! Second, physical references are equally transient, if in a different way... usually that many different libraries throughout the world maintain "cached" copies. Well, maybe Google has cached the now-gone document at a vanished URL? :)
In summary, operationally, give all the information you have in citations, even while recognizing that some of it has an expiration date.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: The best practice is to include standard bibliographic information, a relatively stable hypertext link for current readers (e.g. to the ArXiv), and the DOI.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: No, it is clearly and everyone agrees, not acceptable practice to cite only the URL. So download a PDF copy of the exact web page. You can even state in the publication that you have a copy of the exact PDF which corresponds with your reference. If anyone asks you for sa copy of the PDF, you may wish to do one of the following:
1. Immediately give them the pdf (which may be a license violation). I feel comfortable to do this, in some situations, but not all.
or
2. Tell them you would like to give them your saved copy, after they convince you, that the web site will allow you to give them a copy.
It is not your problem, if the web site will not give you permission, to give others a copy of the saved PDF. However a license violation would be your fault.
Upvotes: -1 |
2012/05/05 | 921 | 3,737 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it OK to present a URL using a link shortening service such as bit.ly? The reason I'm asking is that I think it's a lot easier to enter this URL (e.g., if you read it in a paper) as opposed to full URL. Or is this a bad idea?<issue_comment>username_1: You should never offer a link shortener as the only option in an academic paper, for two reasons:
1. It's adding another point of failure: if the shortening service is down, then the link cannot be followed. This is a particular worry over time, since the service may go out of business.
2. One of the big reasons why link shorteners are so popular is that they keep track of usage statistics. I'd be offended if I thought an author was using this to monitor when the link was followed, where the people following it were located, etc.
So if you offer a shortened URL, it should only be in addition to the real URL, not in place of it. However, I'd tend to avoid even that. It doesn't look professional to me, and I don't think there's much savings for the reader. (Online papers should have clickable URLs, or at least ones that can be copied and pasted, so this only arises for someone who has a printed copy but no online copy. That can happen, but it's hardly a major issue.)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure what you mean when you say it's easier to enter. If someone is reading the paper online, it's a click (in the PDF) either way. And as @AM points out, link rot can then get you in two ways instead of one. In fact you should in general be leery about linking to URLs in a paper unless you have some belief that the URL will persist for the life of the paper itself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Short answer: It depends!
Long answer: Shortlinks are very useful when space is essential, i.e. when advertising something on twitter. Futhermore, they can often be used for analytics which some of those services offer.
Otherwise, it is often better to provide a full link. It looks more professional and gives more information. Since it is a link, it does not need to be typed in, so it might even be better to show a description instead of the link. The full domain also allows users to decide if they want to follow since it gives additional authenticity when the domain is well known. A lot of shortened urls lead to spam sites, or sites that try to introduce trojans.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I have no problem with shortening a link. In a paper, you won't risk your reputation just to have a spam or contained virus link, therefore people won't need to worry about the security. Also, I don't know if other services have this feature, but you can make an customized link as long as it is unique.
For example, this was my link to my dissertation: [bit.ly/epHIVprotease](http://bit.ly/epHIVprotease). (Need not to follow it, I have pulled it down)
Anyone in my field will immediately understand what it says: **electrostatic potential** of a **HIV protease**. So it's also looked professional, I think.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: A better alternative is to use a [DOI](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier) if one is available. The providers of a DOI are supposed to ensure that the DOI is always up to date and points to the correct resource and as such a DOI is a better insurance against link rot than the original URL itself.
DOIs are available for most recent papers (at least the ones I know of) as well as data etc. hosted on for example [figshare](http://figshare.com) and [Zenodo](https://zenodo.org/). Apart from such resources, DOIs are generally not available and in that case I also recommend using the original URL directly.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/05/06 | 813 | 3,270 | <issue_start>username_0: I got my Ph.D. from the Faculty of Computers and Information Technology, Cairo University in 2007. I want to know if it is possible to compensate or to accredit my Ph.D. from USA. If it is possible, I want to know the steps for that. Advise and tell me if there is any program in USA for a Ph.D. holder to improve and add on to his career.<issue_comment>username_1: In the U.S., most academic fields are not like medicine: there is no licensing and for most purposes there are not strict legal requirements for what constitutes a degree. In particular, there is nothing that needs to or can be done to accredit a foreign Ph.D. (Other countries may differ. For example, Germany used to treat non-EU Ph.D.'s differently; see <http://www.zeit.de/2008/12/C-Seitenhieb-12>.)
Regarding more specific issues:
Employers sometimes verify CVs, but that is not your responsibility. If they need to check that you have a legitimate Ph.D. from Cairo University, then they will get in touch with the university directly to verify this. You do not need to help (and in fact they won't allow you to help, to make sure the verification is unbiased), so all you need to do is to make sure everything on your CV is true.
You may run into people who acknowledge that you have a legitimate Ph.D. but have no idea what the standards of Cairo University are. That will give you a modest disadvantage compared with students from, say, Stanford, but there's nothing you can do about it. Ultimately, if you publish strong papers in prestigious venues, then that will matter much more than where your Ph.D. is from. If you don't, then you will not get a research job anyway, wherever you studied.
If you are talking about upgrading the degree somehow - perhaps getting additional certification or even another degree from a particularly prestigious school - then it basically can't be done. It's not truly impossible, and I know of a couple of cases in which people with Ph.D.s from other countries enrolled as students in the U.S. in order to improve their job chances. However, most U.S. universities strongly discourage this, on the grounds that it's a waste of time and resources to devote a space in a graduate program to someone who already has a Ph.D. in the same field (or a closely related one).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Although it is not possible to "accredit" a foreign degree, there are services out there that will determine if your foreign degree is equivalent to a degree issued by an accredited university in the United States. This type of service might be useful for immigration purposes and it might be necessary to apply for certain jobs in the United States, especially in the public sector. [There are lists of foreign degree equivalency service providers available.](http://www.osp.state.nc.us/ExternalHome/Group5/LocalGovmt/ForeignDegreeEquiv.pdf)
If you look at the services offered by Educational Credential Evaluators, the reports [that can be purchased](https://www.ece.org/main/content=EvaluationServices&SubSite=1&LeftNav=2) vary in detail (and, of course, cost). These reports are not cheap and, in most instances, probably unnecessary, so I would hold off on getting one done until I'm positive I'll need one.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/05/06 | 1,535 | 6,483 | <issue_start>username_0: 1. Is it possible if I could get 4 letters of recommendation?
2. How far in advance should I notify those who are writing my letters?
3. Does activity on sites like Quora, Stack Exchange, and Reddit's AskScience
(as well as a personal webpage/blog of one's research) count as
public outreach?<issue_comment>username_1: To riff of off username_2's comment:
* Although only three letters of recommendation are allowed to be considered, you should always have an "emergency" writer on backup just in case one of the other writers can't submit the letter on time for whatever reason (sudden illness, job change, etc.). You don't want to miss out on the opportunity because somebody *else* dropped the ball.
* You should notify them as far in advance as is logistically possible. You should already know who your letter-writers will be; you should find out how much advance time they need now, so that you can plan accordingly in the fall.
* While most of those sites would count as public reach, I don't think Academia.SE would fall under that rubric. Something discipline-specific, on the other hand, would.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think it's helpful to understand how NSF graduate research fellowship applications are reviewed. *[**Caveat lector:** This answer was written in **2012**; the application requirements and the evaluation procedure have both changed significantly since then. I strongly recommending consulting someone who has been on the review panel more recently.]*
Each application consists of the following components: a 2-page personal statement; a 2-page description of past research; a 2-page description of proposed future research, transcripts, and ***exactly three*** recommendation letters. If you attempt to send four, NSF simply refuses the fourth letter; on the other hand, if only two letters arrive by the deadline, your application is rejected without review.
All 10000+ applications are reviewed in a single three-day physical meeting. Applications are split into 30+ subject areas, each considered by a separate review panel. Each panel has 20-30 members and reviews 300-400 proposals. (All these figures are ballparky; panels vary in size depending on the number of applications.)
Before review, applications are divided into levels based on the applicants' time in graduate school: None (30%), less than a semester (30%), less than 12 months (30%), and more than 12 months (10%). All level-1 applications are reviewed together, then all level-2 applications, and so on. **Expectations are significantly higher for more experienced applicants.** The precise expectations obviously vary by discipline, but in computer science, pre-students need a credible research plan, early students need publishable results, and older students usually need multiple publications. The "more than 12 months" level is only for people with extenuating circumstances, like a *significant* change of field.
The 12-month limit counts time that applicants have actually been registered, *not* time since entering their first graduate program. So a student who started a PhD program in August 2011 and does not register for classes this summer will still be eligible in September 2012. **If you want to apply in your second year, do not take classes your first summer.**
Each review consists of a "letter grade" (excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor) and a narrative evaluation of "Intellectual Merit"; a letter grade and a narrative evaluation of "Broader Impact"; and an overall numerical score. The panelists use the numerical scores to cluster the applications into four categories: Yes (10%), Maybe (25%), Honorable Mention (5%), and No (60%). NSF uses the narrative evaluations to decide which Maybes get fellowships and which get honorable mentions.
Every proposal is reviewed twice, the proposals in the *No* pile are retired, and each of the remaining proposals is reviewed a third time. Thus, each reviewer reviews roughly 35-40 proposals. **On average, each reviewer spends 20-30 minutes on each proposal.** That's just enough time to read each of the documents once, make a snap judgement, and then assemble a narrative review from a pile of boilerplate sentences. It's brutal, especially because **most applications are strong**.
So anything you can do to make your reviewers' life easier will work to your advantage. *Every* component of your application should *directly* address each of the [two main review criteria](http://www.nsfgrfp.org/how_to_apply/review_criteria). In particular, all three statements and all three recommendation letters should include a paragraph describing intellectual merit, starting with the phrase **Intellectual Merit** in boldface type, and another paragraph describing broader impact, starting with the phrase **Broader Impact** in boldface type. Both paragraphs should say something specific, substantial, and credible.
For security/privacy reasons, the review panel does *not* have internet access; reviewers are not even permitted to use their own laptops. So if you use your StackExchange participation as an example of broader impact, be specific about *how* you participate; the panelists can't look up your answers or your reputation.
Another point to keep in mind is that reviewers are probably *not* experts in the applicant's chosen subdiscipline. An application by an aspiring astrophysicist studying planetary climatology (to make up a random example) might be reviewed by a high-energy astrophysicist, an expert in planetary formation, and a string theorist. Yes, your statements must include enough field-specific technical detail in your statements to be credible, but the overall goals and merits of your proposed research should be clear to a broader audience.
For fine details, it's always best to talk with faculty in your field who have experience with NSF fellowship winners, either as an advisor, a reference, or a panelist. (The most useful letters read "I have written reference letters for *x* NSF fellowship applicants, of which *y* were successful; I would rank this student among the top *z* of those fellowship winners.") It's also a good idea to talk with [past fellowship winners](https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/grfp/AwardeeList.do?method=loadAwardeeList) in your (target) department; ask to read their applications *and their reviews*.
See also [NSF's advice](http://nsfgrfp.org/applicants/tips_for_applying).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2012/05/07 | 1,265 | 5,399 | <issue_start>username_0: Usually, a person starts out with a single primary research interest as a PhD student (closely related to that of their adviser). But then as they move on through the assistant professor stage, they discover new research interests. Do they usually discover new research interests through collaborations/discussions with professors at their university or through conferences? Or do they discover new research interests through what can earn them funding (through the NSF and other agencies?) Especially since *any* topic could theoretically be interesting to them? (even though they might find some topics more interesting than other topics).
Is it more often that they do what they're most interested in, or that they do what they obtain funding for (and find what they get funding for interesting enough)? And can they sometimes even discover new interests through their PhD students?<issue_comment>username_1: Here are a couple ways that have resulted in new research directions for me:
* **Reading a paper/book.** Reading a paper/book can inspire new ideas. You may find that a paper is missing something, or you think of a way of doing it better, or perhaps you can combine the ideas in the paper with something you already know.
* **Obtaining funding.** Often funding is obtained in groups, generally to inspire collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas. As a result, one is *forced* to venture into new territory.
* **Talking to a colleague (generally from other institute)**. Simply chatting with someone at a conference or when visiting another institute can inspire new research directions. They may have a problem; you may have the tools to solve it.
* **Changing job**. This brings you in contact with new people who have new problems. Collaborations my result from conversations in the coffee room, or by going to research discussions within the new department.
* **Following up on something a student has done**. You may set a masters student, for example, to look at something you find interesting, but have not yet had time to explore in depth. The student may come up with something useful, but then leaves.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Some points (I'm no Prof., but which research topics might "pay out" (wether citations, patents, fame) is imo rather a matter of common scientific sense):
* It may be cheap/easy/time-efficient based on the current lab hardware and expertise/knowledge of the group to "dive" into a additional topic. So I would call this economical reasoning to exploit new research opportunities similar to funding reasons.
* Publish or perish. Which research fields are trendy or will become trendy and offer high chance to publish and get citations. [Visualisation tools](http://well-formed.eigenfactor.org/) for the publishing landscape or search engines might show you which fields are currently booming more or less. Or browse research forums like mathoverflow,citeulike,... to see what top and experienced scientist are currently interested in.
* Finding a niche, which needs of course a really good overview on and understanding of a research field. Contrary to bullet point 2, focusing on a topic/problem no one else is interested in or thinks of may give you the chance to become a trendsetter, find a new effect/phenomenon and may earn you a lot "automatic" citations.
* simply working off the [list of unsolved problems](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems) :) (Wikipedia knows also, what we don't know!), <http://www.openproblems.net/>, science's magazine [125 big questions](http://www.sciencemag.org/content/309/5731/78.2.full)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1451/73) is excellent, and just to add a few more:
* **Changing funding opportunities**. The unfortunate reality is that grants are often hard to come by, and it's not unusual for professors to tailor specific grant applications to the nature of the grants being offered. Depending on how unpopular the professor's previous research interests are at the time, this may result in a shift in research topics.
* **Single topic diverges into multiple topics**. To describe this via example, at one time our lab was working on a neural imaging project related to human decision making. This research led to investigating decision-making on a larger scale, as we tried to create computational models. This led to a few papers detailing the applications of [ontologies](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology) to behavioral and cognitive neuroscience. Simply by following the various aspects of the project we were able to investigate a wide range of topics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As much as possible, I'd encourage you to pick research topics because they really interest you, rather than because you think you can get funding for them. It's so much easier to bring passion and energy to your research when you love it (rather than when you've chosen it to get funding). That said here are a few more ways to develop new research interests.
* **Hear a talk** at a conference.
* Write a paper with a **colleague who knows a different area than you**.
* Chase **references for a paper you are reading or writing**. I often learn quite a bit the first time that I write the introduction of a paper in an area that's new to me.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/05/07 | 1,207 | 4,914 | <issue_start>username_0: Say there is a student who writes a mail to a professor asking for a PhD vacancy or a RA-ship position. Should he attach his résumé in a mail to a professor?
I have had contradictory viewpoints on this. Some people ask not to attach résumés in such mails to professors, saying such mails go straight to spam. They instead prefer having a webpage and providing a URL. This is tough, as students (esp. undergrads) do not have a lot to share on a website. Moreover there is a contradiction: if a professor cannot view a résumé in her browser, what is the guarantee she would visit a website and click each of the sublinks? Looks more implausible to me.
There are others who advise applicants to provide a brief bio instead of a résumé or a URL. Again this could turn out awkward: in a bio, "I did my bachelor's in XYZ University" is fine, but "I was fourth in the Department during my bacheor's" looks out of place.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I prefer to have the résumé or CV attached in the email. If there's not enough detail for me to decide if someone is going to be able to actively contribute to the group, there's no incentive for me to pursue the candidate further.
That said, if someone tells me in the body of the email something like: "I have done X, Y, and Z; and would like to do A and B using method C," then that's OK. At a certain point, the letter does provide enough information for me to determine that (a) the student is competent and (b) will be a good fit for my group. However, my response would be: "That's great—sounds like you're what we're looking for. Can you send me a CV and a list of references?" So we're right back to square one.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I slightly prefer attachments. The problem is that I'm reluctant to reply to e-mails asking for more information, or even to show up on server logs following links, because it may be interpreted as a sign of interest.
Like most faculty members (at least in technical areas), I get enormous numbers of junk e-mails regarding PhD positions or summer research. The general pattern is that they are form letters sent to large numbers of people, almost all of whom ignore the letters. If anyone replies in anything but the most discouraging way, then it inspires a potentially lengthy e-mail exchange that will probably just waste everyone's time.
This is a real problem, and I don't know what to do about it. It's not really fair, but right now the burden is on applicants to stand out from the junk e-mails. In particular, your e-mail should provide compelling proof that you spent at least as long thinking about it and writing it as you expect the faculty member to spend on it. If it looks like it could be a form letter with the professor's name and research topic pasted in, then I'll ignore it, as will many other people. [I should point out that I work in a department with centralized admissions, so I cannot accept students on my own. This is explained on my web page and the department's.]
For example, a clearly personalized e-mail that discusses the professor's research in detail is good. Keep in mind that plenty of people are trying to cheat with this. For example, I regularly receive e-mails saying something like "I found your paper X fascinating when we read it in our seminar", with no further details. This looks like a form letter, and there have been a couple of times when I've received e-mails from the same sender that were identical except for having different paper titles pasted in, with no indication that they had previously e-mailed me about another paper. Maybe a few e-mails are genuine, but they sure look like lies.
So when I get an e-mail regarding PhD admissions or summer research, I'm very skeptical that it's more than spam. There's a five or ten second window to convince me that it's different from the other e-mails, before I set it aside. If it looks promising, then I'll read further, and I'm a little more likely to do so if any information I need is available right there. So I'd recommend attaching whatever is needed.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I do not mind getting a résumé attached to e-mails. However, a tendency I have noted is that I also tend to get scanned copies of assorted certificates sometimes numbering several tens of Mb files. There is no way I will run through such quantities of information. So if you send a résumé, make it brief and to the point.
As Aeismail points out, also make the mail itself concise and clear as to what you are looking for. It may seem like a lengthy mail may be more polite but remember that e-mails are typically used for brief messages. Your mail will end up as one of perhaps hundred on a particular day and a lengthy mail may be put in the "to do list" and postponed until enough time is free to read it (which usually does not happen).
Upvotes: 2 |
Subsets and Splits