date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2012/12/17 | 517 | 2,171 | <issue_start>username_0: >
> **Possible Duplicate:**
>
> [Under what circumstances can one republish a conference paper/presentation?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2673/under-what-circumstances-can-one-republish-a-conference-paper-presentation)
>
>
>
I have recently completed a Masters of Science which I pursued to fill a personal goal and to advance our development of a regional tsunami warning system.
Having read the thread on multiple publishing and presenting I am still confused as this is a new issue for me. Coming from Government we present on special projects or findings any number of times.
If I wish to publish my findings in an academic journal am I precluded from presenting at any conferences?
If I present at a localised scientific conference without published proceedings, am I precluded from presenting at a global one?
Can I focus one on localised context and the other on the global implications, then cite having presented at the local level?<issue_comment>username_1: *Taken from the comments as per request*
This is fairly common. For example, in CS, one might publish preliminary work at a conference, and then flesh it out for a journal (there's a "30% new material" rule in many journals to cover this situation). But to answer your question, doing this doesn't boost publication count except for very dumb ways of evaluating a publication list. Most people (except university bureaucrats) will list the conference and journal paper as one entity.
Note that it is upto the journal editors of the second venue to decide whether the paper is sufficiently different from the first one. They are free to reject it even if you think the latter paper is a nontrivially expanded version of the first one.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Indeed. Economics Letters is a journal where people read summaries of papers and get a good idea of the literature coming out in different specialties of economics, before moving on to reading full technical papers in other journals. So yes, it is quite understandable to submit a summarized watered-down version of a paper to Economics Letters.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/17 | 665 | 2,870 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student and I am often faced with several ideas to explore. Two criteria often I consider in making a choice between approaches are based on the value proposition/ addition and the uniqueness of the approach. However, in the process of research (which I don't have any idea about and I am only in the exploratory phase of an idea) I have to make compromises in choosing between approaches which are not unique but add value and vice versa. I am faced with tradeoffs between the two until I find (or modify/improve) approaches that have both the qualities. My question is to the experienced researchers to share their strategies when they had to choose among approaches based on these two parameters. Which one among the two help in quicker publications or acceptance rate?<issue_comment>username_1: It probably depends on the field and the journal you're aiming at.
For small, low-impact journals, it could be sufficient that an idea is new. If your ambition is not very high, you can submit to such a journal. You might not need to show that the new idea is all that useful.
For more prestigious journals, new is not enough. You need to show that it's actually useful in practical situations or adds something significant. If you want to aim for good journals, then added value is important. However, it should not be a small added value; it should be a significant added value.
If it's not new and the added value is small, probably you'd need to improve the research until you have something more substantial.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Two criteria often I consider in making a choice between approaches are based on the value proposition/ addition and the uniqueness of the approach.
>
>
>
**Ideally, you *don't* choose.** A "unique" approach that doesn't add value isn't worth much. Solving a problem using off-the-shelf techniques also isn't worth much. What you should aim for is a **unique approach that adds value** to the research landscape in your field.
**But if you *must* choose, work toward your strengths.** Do you carry a hammer and look for nails, or do you carry nails and look for hammers? If you're better at finding new tools to attack hard problems, then you're more likely to come up with unique approaches. If you're better at finding hard problems to successfully attack with a small suite of tools, then you're more likely to add value to those tools. I know lots of successful researchers in both camps.
>
> Which one among the two help in quicker publications or
> acceptance rate?
>
>
>
You are optimizing the wrong function. Your primary goal should be to produce the highest quality, highest impact research, **not** to maximize the number of lines in your CV. One good high-impact paper is worth far more than a pile of publications that nobody cares about.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/12/18 | 1,726 | 7,417 | <issue_start>username_0: My adviser asked me to go over some PhD theses over the weekend, and by some he meant three 200~ pages theses.
Is there an effective way to skim through theses that you have figured out, as more experienced academics. I could not go over all of them without taking most of my weekend doing so.<issue_comment>username_1: It is hard to assess.
What is your advisor's expectations? is it a detailed review of the hypothesis, methodology and results of the theses? or it is just *to know* thing?
For not spending too much, I would suggest going directly to the **Abstract**. Then there is one or two **core chapters** discussing the ideas. General sense of what is going on these chapters is good enough.
Again, it depends upon your advisor's expectations. This said, i'm *newbie* to academics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would just start from the table of contents. Usually, the whole thesis is not applicable to your current research, but only a pocket full of sections are. Identify the handful of sections that are most relevant to your research, and just read those. Also, if your advisor specifically requested these particular theses, he/she suspects there's something in particular about them that is of value to your research. Ask him/her what it is about these theses that is most fascinating/relevant to your research and just read that part.
**Bottom line:** Don't try to understand everything in it... just find the parts that most apply to you and your research and get the main idea, not the details.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Of course, you can use existing theses just like you would a journal article where you extract information to guide your research. However, I'd like to focus discussion here on the role of theses as a tool for teaching you how to write your own thesis.
**Choosing theses to deconstruct**:
Assuming you are writing a PhD thesis yourself, it can be really helpful to find a selection of other PhD theses in order to give you a sense of what the overall product can look like. Three is a good start, but I would be aiming to find about six or seven. The best theses are probably those that are
* on a similar topic or at least in the same discipline as your thesis and with a broadly similar methodological orientation
* follow a similar structural framework to your own (e.g., similar length, same in terms of whether it is a large thesis or PhD by publication)
* well written
**Things to learn from deconstruction:** Carefully deconstructing such manuscripts can teach you a lot about both what a thesis involves and also what are some of the alternative modes of presentation. For instance you can look at things like:
* How was it formatted
* How many chapters were there and how was content distributed
* How were aims presented and how was the importance of the thesis justified
* How was literature, method,results, and discussion distributed (e.g., some in each chapter or over separate chapters)
* How extensive or focussed was the literature review
* What was the overall scale of the thesis (e.g., amount of data collection, sophistication of analyses, etc.)
* What is the standard expected of a thesis (e.g., seeing the imperfections of theses that have passed can be helpful should you fall victim to perfectionism)
**When in candidature to spend time deconstructing:**
In fact, examining and deconstructing theses can be a useful exercise at multiple stages of your PhD candidature.
* At the very start of your PhD it can give you a broad feel for what it is that you are aiming to produce.
* When you are moving towards setting out the overall structure of your thesis in terms of chapters and sections it can give you a feel of whether you are on track
* When you are making formatting and stylistic decisions, existing theses can provide a useful frame of reference.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I back up what username_2 said, but as I had to do something similar just a few weeks back, here's what worked for me: **I found most relevant publications (articles) by the same author**.
Typically, there's not that much publications related to a thesis, and there's a possibility that most of the papers are just extensions to the first one. Here's what I think from a Computer Science perspective.
* ***Read the first publication** by the author* related to the thesis topic
* Some of the following articles are probably *application focus* for the (novel) technique presented in the first article, or provide a heavy *math background* - these are not really needed to understand the idea
* There might be an article or two improving the construction algorithm (the concept stays the same, but some implementation improvements)
* In the end, you'll end up reading the **first + one or two other articles** and that will give you a good **idea of what the whole thesis is about**
* Now that you understand the concepts presented in the thesis, *you understand the Table of Contents fully*. You can easily **identify chapters interesting to you**, and read only the selected ones.
It is still a lengthy process, but I think faster than trying to read the whole thesis, and gives a lot result-wise: you not only understood the concepts you needed, but did literature research as well, and know exactly where to look for every type of extra details you might need.
This all said, this is the process that worked for me when *I needed to understand the concept presented, the main idea (but not the details) of implementation, and wanted to be able to apply the concept "by hand" and "on paper" for small mock examples*.
I think the process can be adapted for whatever goal you have in reading the thesis: you almost certainly are not interested in *absolutely everything* presented in the thesis on your first read-out. So, if you are, for example, interested in the *application domain*, you'll read the application focus articles instead, and not math profs.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: This is probably field dependent. In my field tables and contain the majority of the information.
1. Print the abstract, table of contents, list of figures, list of tables, conclusions, and any lists of symbols/nomenclature. You will need these a lot and it is easier to be able to mark them up.
2. Read the abstract and table of contents. Ideally looking for the things that are interesting to you. If the thesis seems to be well written and well organized, then reading the first paragraph of each chapter might be useful.
3. Work you way through the figures and tables. Ideally you will only need the information in the captions, but you may need to refer to the methods for additional information. Use the printed table of contents and the search function to efficiently. Don't read the methods, only use them when you have a specific question.
4. Read the conclusions. Anything that you don't understand/agree with go back to the figures and tables. If you still don't get it, search the results/discussion for references to the corresponding figure/table. If you still don't get it, decide if you really need it. If so, mark it down to figure out later.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Every PhD should at least exhibit explicit *contributions* and some *validation* of them. The devil is in the details, but you can start from those two dimensions.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/18 | 713 | 2,912 | <issue_start>username_0: I was a bit unsure whether this question belonged here, but after finding many questions requesting advice with respect to mathematics studies I decided to go ahead.
Over the last year I have developed a strong interest in mathematics and would like to pursue it at the university level. The long-term goal is graduate studies.
My original intent was to first pursue a B.Sc in mathematics. I had met with the undergraduate coordinator at a university I would like to enrol in and he recommended that based upon my background that I may be better off pursuing a masters degree with a qualifying year comprised of advanced undergraduate courses.
My background is:
* Degrees: B.Comm (Economics), M.A. (Economics)
* Mathematical Courses: Business Calculus, Mathematics for Economists (includes calculus, linear algebra, set theory, optimization, topology), Introductory Statistics, Econometrics
* Research Experience: Four RAships, two upcoming publications (not in mathematics)
* Self-study: *Calculus* (Stewart), *Linear Algebra* (Strang), Currently working on: *A Course of Pure Mathematics* (Hardy)
I would like to ask that given an individual with a background in a quantitative field, what are the pros and cons with pursuing either of these options.<issue_comment>username_1: If possible, avoid the 2nd undergrad. To see if possible, pick an online copy of a typical textbook, level advanced undergraduate/graduate, and browse it for fun, and do some of the early exercises. Examples: Artin: Algebra; Munkres: Topology; Spivak: Calculus on Manifolds (or more advanced; Guillemin & Pollack;: Differential Topology); or better yet, browse whatever the curriculum of your chosen university indicated for this fall semester as text books. It doesn't have to appear easy, as you are supposed to learn it; and learning math is hard, no matter what your future classmates will falsely claim: most of them struggle too. But it shouldn't terrify you either.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm unsure whether the 2nd undergrad will actually help you at all, because I'm not sure how good Undergrads in math are in the US, you might end up re learning a ton of stuff you already knew to begin with. And that can lead to some frustration.
I've gone over Stwart's and Strang's books and they are overall very nice. Try to see what particular topic interests you and go over some papers, see what is missing in your pool of knowledge and build a consensus of where is it being thought.
If you find that most of your deficit can be solved with some Undergrad Courses, and many Grad courses, go for that Graduate degree directly, but if you find that many of your deficits are in an undergrad level, perhaps doing that second undergrad is not such a bad idea, since you would be starting with a handicap against other people coming from a math undergrad.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/18 | 620 | 2,954 | <issue_start>username_0: What is the general opinion among editors about whether my paper should be submitted to review to academics from the same University/department? Will this ever happen? If it does happen, isn't this bad for the quality of peer review because the reviewer might have a good relationship with the person who submitted the paper and may be biased consciously or unconsciously towards giving a favorable review?<issue_comment>username_1: Conflict of interest rules vary between journals, and some are far stricter than others. In general, it's not clear where to draw the line for what's appropriate. Asking someone from the same department to review their colleague's paper would generally not be done, even if no rule forbids it. Beyond that it's a little less clear, and you can make up all sorts of borderline cases. (It's considered fine for people from different University of California campuses to review each other's papers. What about someone from the Harvard biology department reviewing a paper from the Harvard medical school? I don't know, and it's not clear to me that there's a simple rule for deciding what constitutes a conflict of interest.)
Handling conflicts of interest responsibly is an important and difficult part of being a journal editor, since there are all sorts of relationships that are not as easy to detect as a shared departmental affiliation. For example, some people have been best friends since they were in grad school, while others may be enemies or rivals.
Sometimes when evaluating a submission it's valuable to get advice from someone who has specialized knowledge you need, but who also has a conflict of interest. In that case, you should be aware of the conflict and try to adjust for it (for example, by asking the person for objective information rather than opinions). By contrast, it's much more dangerous to rely on someone who has a conflict of interest you are unaware of.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The principle is to obtain an objective review. One basic point is therefore to avoid any petsons with a conflict of interest. It is pretty clear that chosing someone from the same department is very likely to involve a conflict of interest, either by (or equiv.) obtaining an uncritical review or the opposite. Chosing someone from the same university (or equiv.) is perhaps less problematic but for an editor trying to stay clear of possible problems it is likely just as well to avoid such persons as well. The problem is of course larger than this since possible conflicts of interest can exist with many regardless of their location. The honours based system then dictares that reviewers should also decline to review if they believe they cannot provie a fair review or if the involvement can cast such suspicion. We are, however, not living in a perfect world soeditors also have the possibility to moderate apparently unfair reviews.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/18 | 1,228 | 5,356 | <issue_start>username_0: While reviewing research papers, I often find that the author's English is not very good. Considering that English is not everyone's native language, I understand their difficulties, and I recognize that they struggle (using dictionaries and translators) to get their work published at all.
That being said, I sometimes find papers that have contain English that is frankly terrible, with a few select fragments in pristine, almost Shakespearean English, using words that sometimes I didn't even know existed. When this happens, a quick Google search will occasionally reveal that these fragments are copy-pasted fragments from textbooks.
What should I do in these cases? I feel that being too harsh might come of as being mean, but I would really like to emphasize that the practice is very bad for the scientific community.<issue_comment>username_1: This is plagiarism. You should at the VERY least point this out to the editor and suggest (s)he insist the authors get language, translation or copyediting assistance if they can't write their paper themselves.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As Mikael said, copying and pasting from a textbook (or any other source), unless it's properly quoted and cited, is plagiarism. Now, it's possible that this varies a bit between fields and between cultures, but generally speaking, **plagiarism is one of the most serious academic offenses**, probably a step below outright fabrication of results. Well-respected tenured professors at major universities have lost their jobs and had their careers destroyed by a single instance of plagiarism. The point is, this is a very big no-no and you should treat it accordingly. You should definitely notify the editor, and see how they would like you to deal with it. I don't know exactly how that process works, whether the editor will just handle the paper themselves and let you know that your review will no longer be necessary, or whether they'll ask you to finish your review anyway and state your objections in it.
In the latter case, I would write an unequivocal recommendation *against* publishing the paper because of the plagiarism. Personally, I would be inclined not to even look at the scientific content of any such paper, although that may not work out in practice. But anyway, just pointing out the plagiarized parts and recommending against publication, in and of itself, is not mean. Just don't get carried away and start attacking the author. You could apply the same principle that is used at Stack Exchange, namely that it's about the behavior, not the person.
---
If you put aside the plagiarism, there is also the issue of sloppy English that you mentioned. In my experience, (nearly?) all reputable journals require papers to use proper spelling and grammar for standard English, or something reasonably close to it. Usually, the instructions for authors will advise non-native speakers of English to get a native speaker to check the paper for grammatical errors before submission. So it's reasonable for you to point out any such errors that you come across. Now, grammatical errors don't have to condemn a paper to oblivion the way plagiarism might, but if the grammar is bad enough, I would think it reasonable to recommend against publication in its current state. If the underlying ideas are sound, and otherwise qualified for publication, then you could recommend that the authors edit the paper to improve the grammar and resubmit it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I understand exactly what you are going through. I have seen it happen many times before. In some culture it is extremely common for students to think that it is acceptable to plagiarize in this way. However, in my experience, even when students think it is acceptable, they still know it is wrong.
You should call it out for what it is: Plagiarism. In my experience, some students only wake up to the impact of plagiarism when they are shocked into it. I've had students call me mean (and much, much worse) but I've never had a student say that I was unjustified in calling their plagiarism out. They knew what they were doing and they got caught.
I also explained to them how to "right their ship" so this did not cause future problems. In my school, the punishment is quite lenient for plagiarism - just fail (no removal, no academic probation, etc.). But, it is still expected that it is called out when it is found.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In the couple of cases that I have found plagiarism (and that is what has happened here). I always contact the editor directly telling him/her what I have found and that I no longer feel comfortable writing a review. This then puts the burden on the editor to make a decision of how to deal with it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I would see two situations here:
* The English is so bad that you cannot properly review the paper. If you suspect that there is merit in the paper, suggest getting the language polished and encourage to resubmit. Otherwise reject the paper.
* You can follow the story, and provide an in depth review. Just reply as you would normally, and mention polishing the language as one of the additional remarks.
Just copying without reference is just plagiarism, and should lead to rejection of the paper.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/12/18 | 2,838 | 11,685 | <issue_start>username_0: My supervisor keeps on delaying and postponing my defense date, taking long periods of time between revisions (1 month of "revision" where the document is in his hands). He has done this 2 times already, so I have been sitting here waiting for a total of 2 months now. This last "revision" he sent it back to me with six or seven nitpicky grammar errors, (ie places I had left out words such as "the" or "when"), and the content-related comments he had were extremely trivial.
I feel like he keeps on showstopping my defense date due to nitpicky grammar errors, and it is impacting my career (obviously, my Master's degree now has 3 years on it, instead of the expected 2). At this point **I don't care** about grammar errors (and I believe we must have found them all already) or clarity of expression or making perfectionist type improvements. I feel really angry and I feel like writing a letter of complaint to my graduate program director. Each term I have to stay bleeds more money out of my account, and the situation is making me really upset.
So far, I've been very polite and professional and have not "exploded". I've hidden my emotions and my anger and *not* complained about what I feel is getting quite *ridiculous*. Should I complain? Should I let him know how I feel? Or should I just keep on going with it and "grin and bear" until it's over?<issue_comment>username_1: The things you call "nitpicky grammar errors" are often (in my experience) symptoms of a deeper problem:
that the student has stopped caring about raising the thesis to a suitably high standard, and has not grasped what "completed" means in the context. An unfinished thesis simply can't be marked.
First, get your own proof-reader, and get help in getting all of these problems fixed - your supervisor is too busy to be a proof-reader, and it's an inefficient use of limited supervisory time.
**Why is the grammar sloppy?**
For different students, the underlying cause will differ; some won't be writing in their native language; some are careless; some have weak language skills; some haven't grasped the importance of good grammar and spelling to clear communication and to academic publishing. I've no idea which of these is true in your case, or if it's something else - that's between you and your supervisor.
**Whose problem is it anyway?**
You don't care about your grammar errors. That is **your** problem, not your supervisor's. You are angry. Again, that's **your** problem. Trying to make it your supervisor's problem, will make an enemy of someone who you need on your side. You think your supervisor's comments on content are trivial, and that is also **your** problem, not your supervisor's problem.
And now this post has maybe made you angry too. And that would also be **your** problem, not my problem.
I say all this, because accepting that they are your problems, is the first step to fixing them.
**Collaboration not conflict**
The problem that I am trying to help you fix, is that your supervisor is telling you what you need to finish, and you seem to resent doing it. Supervision **has** to be a collaborative partnership, not a battle. Now, in theory, it's your supervisor's job to make it such. However, in some cases, in academia as well as in the real world, you often need to manage your manager - and that can mean **you** taking responsibility for ensuring that it is is a collaborative relationship.
So, find out what incentivises your supervisor, and try to put those incentives in place. Is it publishing papers? Esteem within the department? Conference papers? Get your supervisor on your side.
**The worst case**
And (take a deep breath): sometimes, when a thesis is genuinely bad, it's not apparent at first. All one sees on the first couple of readings, are a few errors here, and a few errors there; but when they're corrected, new problems appear.
It gets to be like "Star Wars the Phantom Menace" - the East Coast of the US produced one homebrew re-edit of it, to fix some problems; the West Coast produced a different homebrew re-edit, to fix other problems; but in the end, both re-edits and the original are pretty awful films: fixing the most obvious problems just exposed other problems.
I really really hope that's not the case in your case; but as this answer will hopefully be read by many people in your shoes, then at some point, it will be true for one of them. And at that point, that person and their supervisor need to think about a radical rewrite, or walking away from it as a lost cause.
**Where to go from here**
But for almost all cases, it's just a matter of getting your supervisor onside, getting a definitive list of the problems, and then you doing what your supervisor says is required to fix them. With them, write a checklist, and then return the checklist to them, with a note next to each one, stating how and where you've fixed it, or how you're defending it.
And finally - this post will inevitably contain spelling and grammar errors - it's [Muphry's law](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law) in action. But that doesn't invalidate the advice in any way. With language, **context is everything**. This post is not academic scholarship; your thesis is.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I am going to take a slightly narrower perspective than EnergyNumbers here, and focus on the specific facts of your situation, as you have mentioned them. Note that my conclusions will be derived from this, so if the facts as stated in your question are not correct (either by ellipsis or exaggeration, most likely), my advice would be different.
>
> taking long periods of time between revisions (**1 month of "revision" where the document is in his hands**). He has done this **2 times already**, so I have been sitting here waiting for a total of 2 months now. This last "revision" he sent it back to me with **six or seven** nitpicky **grammar errors**, (ie places I had left out words such as "the" or "when"), and **the content-related comments** he had were extremely trivial.
>
>
>
Note that I can't consider *“nitpicky”* and *“extremely trivial”* as facts, but as statements of your opinion on the validity and scope of these comments. Also, I assume that your thesis is somewhere between 50 and 100 pages in length (if it's 10 or 500 pages, the problem is different).
---
The busy supervisor hypothesis
==============================
This assumes that:
* you did in fact correct the grammar mistakes pointed out to you (and I'd say that 7 such errors in what I assume is a 50–100 page thesis cannot really be considered sloppy writing);
* the content-related comments were few, easily fixed (order of presentation, showing additional data or removing some overly detailed graphs, etc.), and you actually fixed them quickly;
* no further comment was made to you on the overall quality or suitability of your thesis.
Then, you should have a calm and professional discussion with your supervisor, highlighting the difficulty of your current situation and the necessity of working together to reach an outcome satisfactory to both of you. Say explicitly that:
* you understand that a necessary standard has to be met by your thesis,
* you are ready to hear that it is not yet met,
* however, you need more specific guidance to reach this goal, since you have fixed in a timely manner everything that was pointed out to you, and yet you can't defend.
Stay courteous, base your questions (and answers) on facts, and ask for him to do the same. Reading a thesis and commenting on it shouldn't take one month, and if the modifications to be made are as you indicated, no further work on it would be necessary once they have been discussed and integrated.
If that doesn't succeed, and your supervisor seems to busy to devote to you the time necessary or simply doesn't care about it now that the scientific part of the work is over (it happens!), go ask the graduate program director for help. Maybe not by a formal written letter at first, just ask for his advice in a given situation. See what comes out of it.
---
In all cases, **whatever you do, stay professional**. You should highlight the harshness of the situation for you, whether when talking to your supervisor or to others, without letting your emotions dominate the discussion. (Yes, it can be hard.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Your goal is to graduate, i.e. to get the masters degree awarded to you.
You have a roadblock which prevents you from reaching the goal - your supervisor keeps on delaying and postponing your defense date. The reason you stated is that he is taking long periods of time between revisions due to nit-picky grammars errors on the draft of your master thesis. You are asking this question on this board to seek advices on what to do. One of your questions is: should you let him know you're angry or not?
I'll answer your questions by asking you a question first, do you think letting him know you're angry will work? Do you think he will sign on your thesis after you tell him you are angry? Or the situation will become even worse after you express your anger?
I think the answer is the latter - the situation will be even worse. The supervisor is responsible for the quality of the student's thesis. You said in one of your comments, "he doesn't seem to understand the meat of it." No supervisor would put his signature on a thesis he does not understand.
After reading your question a couple of times, I think your English writing is not bad. I cannot say how good the writing of your thesis is because I never read it. If there are any grammar errors, it would take you only days to fix them, not months.
So, what is the problem? I think there is obviously a communication issue. You said you sent him many e-mails(in one of your comments). No avail. You think he did not give you enough time. I believe there should be ways to talk to him. For example, make an appointment on his calendar and say you need to talk to him to address your concerns. He is your supervisor after all. He would have to give you some time no matter how busy he is.
However, what are you going to say in that meeting? Are you going to say you want to graduate, your bank account will dry out, you already spent three years for your masters degree, etc.? Those are your personal issues, not his concern. He is not your parent. He does not care how much money is left in your bank. What he does care is the quality of the thesis. I do believe that he will sign off on your thesis **once he is convinced that your thesis is of good quality.** Now, we are coming back to your question, why he keeps nit-picking the grammar errors? I think there is something between you and him. I, as an outsider, can only guess. A supervisor/advisor is more like a coach. Every coach has his own style. Some would not directly tell you what to do. Instead, he would make you re-read and re-write the thesis to make it more understandable and better. Is he that kind of supervisor? I don't know. What I do believe is, he wants a good thesis. Hope this helps.
**Update after seeing OP's comment**
The OP put in a comment in response to Jase's question *So how does your supervisor respond to those e-mails?*, OP says *With progress reports and updates, like, "I'm halfway through this chapter", but I find he basically skimmed it when I get it back.*
My suggestion is, have a presentation for him. It can be just half hour to an hour long. Pretend you're having a defense. Give him the meat of your thesis. So that he won't need to spend that much time to find them in the thesis draft.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/12/18 | 4,056 | 16,334 | <issue_start>username_0: As a very new researcher who is exploring the best way to generate ideas, some guidance on this question would be very helpful. I have found that this is NOT easy. Ideas seem to pop out of my Professor every day and I wonder how he does it. This question is broad;
* How do you tend to come up with initial/seed ideas? What is your search method (if you have one)?
* What proportion of your ideas for past papers come from; (i) colleagues, (ii) intentionally browsing the literature for ideas, (iii) on the spot inspiration, (iv) conferences, (v) other?
* How do you prioritize research ideas?
* Is there any special, generalizable method that you've discovered to sift out those ideas that are likely to be unrealistic early on in the process of idea generation?
Based on small amounts of anecdotal evidence I have reason to believe that there is vast heterogeneity among professors regarding the above questions. For example, economist <NAME> says he works on 22 papers at once. A professor I know will have maybe 25% of this at any one time.
Related but not duplicate: [Is there any software or tools for managing developing research ideas?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/4820/is-there-any-software-or-tools-for-managing-developing-research-ideas)<issue_comment>username_1: Okay, as you say, this is very broad, and possibly argumentative. So, I'll try to section off my answer for your various sub-questions, and talk not so much about how *I* do come up (and organize) research ideas, but how I see it done by everyone (including me).
---
Coming up with ideas
--------------------
>
> The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” but rather, “hmm... that's funny...” *— <NAME>*
>
>
>
It's probably very akin to asking a large number of artists *“how do you come up with inspiration?”*, i.e. you can probably get one thousand different answers, and yet not useful answer at the same time. However, there are some elements that I think are common to all. You can't “trigger” new ideas to come into your mind, but you can put your mind into the right disposition to host these new ideas: recognize them and welcome them. Below is a list, certainly partial and limited, trying to detail my perspective in this matter:
* **Be challenged!** Nothing sparks ideas more than being confronted with contradiction, healthy criticism, a spirited debate, maybe a bit of competition. Some people manage to do that by themselves, arguing against their ideas and improving them. I myself (and most of the colleagues and students I have seen) need an echo chamber, someone to discuss things with. If they're not exactly from your field, all the better, as they may have unusual/naïve/silly questions or expectations.
To give an example, some of the most “successful” ideas I have had came while answering questions, for example from a PhD student or colleague, and replying by “no, it doesn't work like that… in fact, it's probably always guaranteed to be false, because… see, it's linked to X… or maybe it's not? hum…”
* **Be curious!** Ideas come from problems. Identifying worthy problems in your field of research, and dissecting larger issues into of specific problems of manageable scope, is at least as hard as coming up with new ideas. In the end my feeling is that, especially for a researcher, all ideas are the result of one’s curiosity.
* Manage to get some free time for thinking (and not: teaching, supervising, tutoring, reviewing, writing, sleeping, …). Body and mind. Sure, an idea can pop into your head any time, but it's probably less likely to happen when you teach basic calculus all day that when you get some time to really *think*.
* Know your field, know where a new development need to occur, what is currently missing. Read review papers, [search for such ideas through people's articles or blog posts](http://blog.phds.org/2007/1/24/getting-research-ideas), discuss with senior colleagues who have a comprehensive view of the field, …
One of the ways you can come with ideas is by analyzing how different groups work in your fields, seeing what has been addressed and avoided, what big questions are still open, and how you can link between different works to build a coherent global picture… This is not always successful, but it usually generates some good ideas along the way!
* Explore more or less closely related fields, and see if there is something from *your* background that you could apply to *their* problems, or ways you could build something together. Such ideas tend to be very strong, because you can oftentimes apply an entire branch of knowledge (ideas, methods, algorithms, etc.) to a very different problem. In that case, the added value comes from your *different* perspective, as you might try things that others would not think of.
* Ways have been devised to come up with new ideas on a given topic, either alone or in group sessions. [Brainstorming](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainstorming) is probably the best know such method (and might be the most popular, in one form or another), but a really large number of [creativity techniques](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity_technique) have been developed. They can be applied both to enhance creativity or to boost problem solving efficiency.
---
Organizing ideas
----------------
A quote often attributed to Kant: *“someone’s intelligence can be measured by the quantity of uncertainties that he can bear”*. If that true, that has serious consequences for research. Accepting that your mind can only efficiently support a finite number of ongoing research ideas, you have to come up with ways to write them down, organize them, prioritize them, come back to them later, etc. Just as you cannot juggle with as many balls as you'd like, such “external” tools will help your brain focus on the ones that you assign high priority (or the ones to which *it* gives high priority; the brain works in funny ways).
Most people use very low-tech tools for that:
* [Notebooks](http://www.cgu.edu/pages/900.asp), either sorted chronologically or thematically; in the later case, open a series of blanks pages for each new project/idea, and flip through the book whenever you want to check on them. I use a [Moleskine](http://www.moleskine.com/us/collections/model/product?id=61152) ([WP](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moleskine)) for that purpose; having a nice, leather-bound notebook somehow helps me “value” it more and treat it with care (always have it with me, actually use it).
* Post-it’s scattered through one’s (real or virtual) desktop. Downsides are obvious.
* More people than I thought actually don't use any tools, and just keep all in their mind. Apparently it can be done, but I don't advise it.
But more complicated methodologies have been devised, that are supposed to help you with it:
* [Mind mapping](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind-mapping), either on paper or software-based.
* Using todo-list flat or two-dimensional todo-list software, or more complex task-tracking software (see, e.g. [Trello](https://trello.com)).
* The software side of this question is already covered (though possibly not extensively) [here on this very Q&A site](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/4820/is-there-any-software-or-tools-for-managing-developing-research-ideas/5854#5854).
Finally, don't underestimate the possibilities opened by delegating: people in charge of a specific project or sub-project (PhD students or post-docs) can be tasked with maintaining a list of ideas by all contributors of the project, to come to later on.
---
Answers to your miscellaneous smaller questions:
>
> What proportion of your ideas for past papers come from; (i) colleagues, (ii) intentionally browsing the literature for ideas, (iii) on the spot inspiration, (iv) conferences, (v) other?
>
>
>
Most ideas are hardly “traceable” to one source or another. A given idea might have formed in my head during a conference, seeing how people were failing to address a certain issue, then crystallized during a discussion with colleagues, but would never have occurred to me if not for a literature review I had performed a few months before.
---
*I'll come back a bit later and continue working on this answer :)*
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'll address two points in your question (the overall question is quite broad):
* *Ideas seem to pop out of my Professor every day*: If you've worked on enough problems, you amass a collection of tools and mental shorthands that you can apply to a new problem. It's a matter of experience. You also might see someone else's paper and realize that they are doing something in a clumsy way and you have learnt a better way to do it, and so on.
I wouldn't worry too much about this: it's a matter of time and experience, and will happen on its own. You're not evaluated on the number of ideas you have in any case. You might want to check how many of these ideas are actually good ones :).
* *How do you tend to come up with initial/seed ideas?*: When you're first staring at a problem, it can be intimidating and difficult. While there's no single strategy for getting a "leg up", some useful techniques (and these might be very math/CS specific) are:
+ **simplify the problem**: can you solve a simpler version ? if not, can you simplify even further ? Often, finding the largest solvable element starts to get your mind rolling
+ **pattern match**: does this problem look like something related that has been solved ? can you borrow a method from there ? if not, why not ? again, the goal is to get your mind off the "ZOMG THIS PROBLEM IS TEH HARD" and onto "Here's a tiny piece that I can chew on".
I'm sure others will have useful ideas as well. Ultimately, you'll find that getting ideas isn't the problem: it's getting GOOD ideas that is hard.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Do you, when presented with anything related to your research, routinely ask, "Why is that? How can I tell if that is the case?"
If not, try doing so.
If so, you probably won't be short on ideas. Your problem will be sorting the good ones from the bad ones.
Then start asking "Is this important? How can I explain why it is important?"
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Here is some things I found useful:
1. Attending public seminars at the department could spark nice
ideas (even if it seems not related to your research).
2. Chatting with other graduate students.
3. Reading deeply with **why?** in mind. This means reading a lot and also means stopping more than usual in the assumptions hypothesis and results for different papers.
4. Read future work and conclusions of the papers. Some papers have a real list of future research ideas.
5. Capture the Big Picture. This usually will result in many **whys** for what you encountered.
6. **Ask Questions**.. Even what seems as silly and fundamental questions for some can be the key for good ideas.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Be open/curious to what related disciplines are doing. In some you'll see that the way they solve their problems could also applied to your field but hasn't been tried yet.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I would recommend [Pragmatic Thinking and Learning: Refactor Your Wetware](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1934356050) by <NAME>. This book has some very good tips for coming up with ideas, research or otherwise.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: The most practical way is to go to the Library and look through journals for articles that interest you.
When you have found a selection, then sort them by
a) Is this a current concern in your field?
b) Is the prevailing methodology/technique practical - have you the resources?
c) Will your supervisor(s) find this project interesting?
When you can answer all three questions as Yes, then do a deeper literature research and assess again whether the project is doable in the time available and publishable (sound and interesting to people in your field).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Maybe you could try approaching the problem from another direction,
"What is it that you would like to achieve? what is the purpose of your research?"
There are millions of problems in life at the moment, and finding things to research is not the problem at all, even though it may seem that way.
Inspiration is not purely found in a textbook, but are a function of the mind and soul and body.
Experience is what probably allows your professor to come up with constant questions. He probably practices free thinking, whereby he doesn't feel constrained in any way by other people and current belief systems.
Maybe a lot of the problems that actually need to be understood, such as mental health and problems that people and our planet, experience everyday, just aren't being taken into your current world-view.
Science in itself is not an end. Science is a state of being, including understanding; and is a way that you as an intelligent, caring and investigative person (I presume) approach problems.
A classic example of a problem is, that we don't understand. However, simply not understanding something is not a problem. A problem is something that has effects in the real world, such as, how can we help infertile couples reproduce and have children? Although it appears that now that we have resolved this in some detail, that it was the problem of not understanding DNA and the details of reproduction that probably is what resulted, with in vitro fertilisation, and even in vivo transplants etc. If one were to take the time to step out of this 'curiosity breeds progress' mindset, it would appear that these problems weren't purely driven by a quest for knowledge, but from real world problems, that have fortunately been solved.
I'd be interested in further discussion, as I have only this evening come up with an idea myself!
There's always a thirst for improvement, and this won't cease until people realize that happiness doesn't come from materials. Happiness is within all of us, all we have to do is tap into it. Being only 24 I have seen some truly eye-opening things and I am very humble to each of our personal strengths, but I do feel its a shame that research has become so fascinated with one-upmanship, and away from the real potential and benefit of being so intelligent.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: I am also a green researcher, and similarly to you, I find coming up with ideas a daunting task. I have tried to approach this task in a bit more systematic way, than to just be waiting for Godot. Feel free to draw inspiration!
1. Finding a problem to work on
I keep a list of interesting problems. This could be something a hear about at a seminar, read about in an article, or just something I think about. I write it down - usually half a page, only few references - and forget about it. I can then pull out my list, and find something. Some of the problems quickly turn out to be too small to be interesting, others not.
2. Starting out
When one of my problems are deemed interesting enough, I turn to lit. study. This goes on until I find someone with an interesting treatise. Then I read it, and try to reproduce the result as they do it. (I should here mention that my field is theoretical)
3. Reproducing - talk about it
I can use quite some time reproducing previous authors' work. But it is very fruitful, and you tend to learn something. I try to give a local seminar about the work at this point, the junior people in my department does bi-weekly blackboard seminars, where presentations like this are encouraged for exactly this reason.
4. New work!
At this point it is hopefully possible where I can go in and improve state of matter. So I start. This can sometimes require correspondence with the author of aforementioned work.
5. Talk about it - again!
For me, discussing my work with peers is essential. At this point I would try to sneak in two slides about 'ongoing work' in a conference presentation in order to get feedback from peers and seniors from the field.
From this point on it is not so much getting the idea anymore, as following through on it. I will leave that to another day.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/18 | 1,440 | 5,480 | <issue_start>username_0: The NSF has recently released [a new version of their Proposal & Award Policies and Procedures Guide](http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/index.jsp), releasing their previous guides. (See their [Dear Colleague Letter](https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/index.jsp).) This contains a number of changes to the policies regarding grant proposal reviews and ongoing reporting.
However, it is unclear to me whether any of these are likely to be significant in practice for PIs; many of them sound primarily bureaucratic in nature. The list of changes seems like it was written by a bureaucrat and seems likely to be of interest only to a bureaucrat, and of modest relevance to PIs (e.g., it might change a few section headings in proposals to comply with the new requirements, but not make any fundamental changes to what we propose or how we do research).
Are any of these changes significant enough that PIs should be paying serious attention to them? Are there any changes that are important enough that they would make a substantive change to how we write proposals or do research or interact with the NSF, and if so, which changes are those, and what will their impact be? In short, if a colleague of yours (a fellow PI) asked you what the impact of these changes will be, are there any changes that rise high enough that you would highlight them as important to be aware of?<issue_comment>username_1: At the top of a recent NSF Solicitation the following note exists:
>
> A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures
> Guide (PAPPG), [NSF 13-1](http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13001), was issued on October 4, 2012 and is
> effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 14,
> 2013.
>
>
> Please be aware that significant changes have been made to the PAPPG
> to implement revised merit review criteria based on the National
> Science Board (NSB) report, [National Science Foundation's Merit Review
> Criteria: Review and Revisions](http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2011/meritreviewcriteria.pdf). While the two merit review criteria
> remain unchanged (Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts), guidance
> has been provided to clarify and improve the function of the criteria.
> Changes will affect the project summary and project description
> sections of proposals. Annual and final reports also will be affected.
>
>
> A by-chapter summary of this and other significant changes is provided
> at the beginning of both the [Grant Proposal Guide](http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_sigchanges.jsp) and the [Award &
> Administration Guide](http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/aag_sigchanges.jsp).
>
>
>
By my reading of the section in the PDF that lists the changes, the following might be of interest to PIs:
>
> Chapter II.C.2.f(i)(c), Biographical Sketch(es), has been revised to rename the “Publications” section to “Products” and amend terminology and instructions accordingly. This change makes clear that products may include, but are not limited to, publications, data sets, software, patents, and copyrights.
>
>
>
Plus, a minor change to the Indirect Costs section w.r.t. international participants, a minor change in the Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources listing,
A change in the definition of "New Awardee":
>
> Chapter II, Introduction, has been modified regarding the period of time after which an organization is considered a “new awardee”. Organizations that have not had an active NSF award within the last five years (formerly two years) should be prepared to submit basic organization and management information and certifications.
>
>
>
Prior funding:
>
> Chapter II.C.2.d, Project Description, has been revised to clarify that, in the Results from Prior NSF Support section, “prior” NSF support includes current NSF funding. This section also was updated to indicate that information should be included irrespective of whether or not the support was directly related to the proposal, or whether or not salary support was provided.
>
>
>
References Cited:
>
> Chapter II.C.2.e, References Cited, has been updated to specify that if there are no references cited, a statement to that effect should be included in this section of the proposal and uploaded into FastLane.
>
>
>
And various other minor changes...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: No, there are no earth-shattering changes.
There are some minor changes that you may need to be aware of when you write a proposal, but they mostly come down to changes the titles of sections and that sort of thing. They may affect some PIs, but for most PIs, the changes are primarily clarifications or modest bureaucratic tweaks. For example, they are unlikely to change that way that grant review panels review proposals, or to change how you are allowed to spend the money that you receive in a grant.
One change you'll notice is how you enter the summary page. Instead of preparing a one-page summary page, you now will have to paste your text into three separate textboxes (project overview, intellectual merit, broader impacts), and the length limit is in characters rather than pages.
There's a great summary in the Chronicle of Higher Education: [Don't Underestimate NSF's New Grant-Submission Rules](http://chronicle.com/article/Dont-Underestimate-NSFs-New/136521/).
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/19 | 2,651 | 11,782 | <issue_start>username_0: One of my friends submitted a paper to a reputable communications journal and received some reviews a week back. The paper was rejected, but the review comments were abysmal:
* The language was so bad in one of them that it was difficult to understand what the reviewer was hinting at. Besides, the comments pertained to trivial things like the naming of axes, and there was no comment on (or understanding of) the overall work.
The second of the three reviewers rejected the paper in one line, saying it was impossible for him/her to understand what the paper was aimed at.
The third reviewer appreciated the paper and its results and made good suggestions for improving the results.
The editor-in-charge has rejected the paper since the vote was 2/3 in favour of that, but my friend feels hard done as he feels the two reviewers did not merit the opportunity to review the work.
What recourse does an author have if his paper is rejected by a reputable journal but the review comments indicate a serious lack of understanding of the paper's work? Should the author write his/her grievance to an editor higher in the hierarchy (an associate editor, for example)? Or is ditching the journal and submitting it somewhere else the only solution?<issue_comment>username_1: The first course of action is to reply to the editor who made the decision. Write to them, say that you are willing to improve the manuscript for publication given some guidance from the referees, but the judgement by referee #2 seems a bit rash and not thoroughly justified. Possibly, send to them a revised version of the manuscript, taking into account comments made so far, and ask them to reconsider their decision. You can also hint that you would like them to send the (revised) manuscript to yet another reviewer (some editors have the concept of an “adjudicating” reviewer, even though the editor should actually ne the adjudicator).
The second avenue to try, if the first one does not succeed, is to ask the matter to be escalated to the associate editor (or senior editor, or arbitration committee…). The exact procedure will be indicated in the journal’s instruction to authors, but usually one way is simply to ask the corresponding editor to forward it. For example, at the end of your email from step #1 asking for him to reconsider his decision, you could say:
>
> We strongly believe that you might find our revisions and this justification sufficient to consider our paper for publication in *XXXX*. If that is not the case, we would like this matter to be escalated to an Associate Editor.
>
>
>
Be aware that it's somewhat of a strong option, because people usually don't change their mind very easily, and they don't like to prove their colleagues wrong. So, one option you really have to consider is simply publishing your paper in another journal. At least, sketch something like a risk/benefit analysis before appealing the editor’s decision.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: F'x has ably covered one possible reason: that it's not you, it's them.
I'm going to cover the other side of things. That is, starting from the assumption that the editor has made a good decision.
The authors should consider rewriting the abstract and introduction. If two peer reviewers didn't understand the paper, the paper may just need a savage reworking.
The authors may also wish to try working with a freelance development editor.
Finally, the authors might want to bring on board a co-author who's been frequently published: I expect that many decent-sized, decent-quality departments have at least one person whose quality of writing leads to get manuscripts getting accepted first time, pretty much every time.
And then submit to a different journal. I don't know the field, but I'm willing to speculate that there are a few reputable journals where the article could be published.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: There is an extremely simple rule for dealing with reviews that make you unhappy. Here is the rule: **it's not them, it's you**. This rule of thumb implies, it is never the reviewers' fault. Rather, it is *always* your responsibility.
Oh, you say the reviewers didn't seem to understand the paper? Well, that's your fault. It is *your* responsibility to make sure the paper is comprehensible to its intended audience. If the reviewers didn't understand the paper, odds are that the rest of the readers of that journal/conference won't either. Maybe you need to do a drastic rewrite to make the paper more understandable. Or, maybe you submitted the paper to the wrong place.
The reviewers didn't seem too excited about the paper, and they gave you a short one-line review, or they focused on nitpicky comments about grammar and didn't say much else? Well, that's on you. It's *your* responsibility to convince readers that your results are significant. Maybe your paper's results just aren't up to the level of significance expected at that journal/conference, and you should be submitted somewhere else. Or maybe the paper didn't adequately make the case for why people should care about your results.
Why this rule? Because authors are notoriously poor at seeing the shortcomings in their own work. No parent thinks their *own* baby is ugly. When you get negative reviews, it is natural and human to assume the reviewers are idiots and too blind to see the brilliance of the work sitting before them. Well, that's fine. Take a moment to curse the reviewers, and get it out of your system. Then calm down, and think more rationally. It is rare to find cases where reviewers are stupid or lax in their duties; it is much more common to find that there is something valid behind their reviews.
Realistically, if the reviews are negative, the most constructive thing you can do is improve the paper and re-submit (possibly to somewhere more suitable). There is almost always some way that you can improve the paper and that you can learn from the reviews you got back.
I realize my rule might seem like an oversimplification. Well, technically, I suppose it is, but it's a lot more accurate than most folks who are new to the field realize.
In my experience, complaining to the editor rarely leads to any positive result. I suppose that in the most extreme of cases, it could be warranted, but I would have a heavy presumption against that. And, you probably don't have enough experience to form a judgement on that. Before complaining to an editor or appealing the decision, sit down with someone much more senior and more experienced and ask for their advice. If they are skeptical or neutral, don't bother complaining; just improve the paper and submit it elsewhere. Only if they tell you that complaining is the right thing to do should you consider complaining to the editor.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: While I agree with D.W's views that authors tend to not see the flaws in their own work and that complaining to the editor rarely helps, I do not completely agree that "the reviewers are under no obligation to provide suggestions for improvement.”
According to the Council of Science Editors’ white paper on publication ethics, one of the responsibilities that peer reviewers have towards authors is “Providing written, unbiased feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work, together with the documented basis for the reviewer’s opinion.”
While author definitely need to revise the paper based on reviewer comments, reviewers should also make an attempt to understand the paper they are reviewing and provide detailed feedback as far as possible.
From what you have described, I can identify two genuine problems with the reviews:
1. Reviewer #2 has not given any detailed comments
2. Reviewer #1 has not given any comments on the merits or shortcomings of the overall work
Although complaining to the editor might not help, such superficial reviews should be brought to the notice of the editor. In my opinion, there is no harm in writing to the editor politely explaining that while you respect the reviewers' opinion, it would be helpful if you could get more detailed feedback about the scientific drawbacks of your paper from reviewers #1 and #2.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Would like to add the following to other answers:
* No paper will be accepted with 2 reviewers voting for reject.
Usually, single reject will seal the fate of the paper, so don't be surprised that the editor rejected the paper.
* I absolutely, as an author, reviewer, and editor, agree with the "it is probably your fault" theory. If 2 reviewers say the paper is reject, then either you chose the wrong journal (and wrong audience, reviewers ARE members of your audience as well), or your paper is really not worthy of publication.
* You assume that a reviewer with broken English did not understand the paper; that is perhaps true, but again, it is your responsibility as an author to make the paper appealing to the journal audience. Many fresh researchers actually forget that the end goal of publishing is that someone reads your paper, accepted papers which are not even read and cited by nobody are a sad witness to the race to the bottom in the current scientific community.
* The reviewers may have misunderstood your paper, but that may be due to your improper use of terminology, (too) complex language or simply the fact that you selected the wrong journal. Still your responsibility.
* And finally, the question of whether to appeal to the decision of the editor. Never, if majority of reviewers are in agreement, because editor's hands are effectively tied, and these reviewers will be insulted if they see the paper accepted or get the revision of your paper to review, after they already judged your paper to be not suitable.
* The rare exception to the above rule is when you get significantly differing reviews, e.g. two very good reviews, and the single negative reviewer appears to have misunderstood the paper or is in some or other way incompetent to review the paper. Note that in such cases (2 good 1 reject) the decision of the editor is usually "reject" as well. This is the rare case, when you have any chances to appeal the decision. I did it once, and was successful, however the appeal was lodged to editor-in-chief who assigned the paper to different editor, and the review process was repeated. This is as much as you can hope for.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: First off, if reviewers do not understand your paper, either the editorial staff or the journal has done a piss poor job of allocating a reviewer to review your work or your paper is subpar in putting its point across. While the former is also a possibility, it seldom is in reputable journals. Since everyone here is talking a shot at you (author), let me take the opposing view point.
---
While there may be other conflict of interests or differing school of thought that may also prompted the rejection. It is quite possible that the reviewers have working drafts that align too closely to your work, or rendered mute by your findings, or that they are subjective in accessing the merits of your work because it conflicts with their scientific ideology/methods/practice. The rejection or the lack of "understanding" might be an escape from giving an actual feedback that benefits the paper!
---
The only recourse to all this is to have an open review process where it is equally possible to contest the findings of a paper and contest the reviewer's lack of clarity for rejecting a paper. Till that happens, reviewers are the gate keepers and will play favorites in who is allowed to publish and who is pushed down to second tier journals.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/19 | 504 | 2,048 | <issue_start>username_0: I have BS in Biotech, an MS in Neuroscience and applying MD-Phd next June. I have always wanted to go into academia and eventually establish my own lab. However, I have been receiving a lot of critical feedback about MD-Phd programs. Suggesting that to be a good Physician, you don't need a PhD, and good PhDs don't need the MD. That most MSTP graduates end up utilizing only one degree. I was under the impression to do good translation research--an MD-PhD would be the best option. What are the befits/disadvantages of applying MD-PhD?
I know the faculty I would like to work with, already. Would contacting them improve my chances during the application process?<issue_comment>username_1: Doing good translational research is hard because it requires a good understanding of clinical issues (both from the patient and carer sides) and a strong research background. In order to obtain those skills you need to spend time in the clinic and time in the lab. An MD-PhD program guarantees that you will have the opportunity to spend time in both environments. It is worth noting that having that opportunity doesn't mean you will capitalize on it. Further, you don't need to do an MD-PhD to have that opportunity.
Another advantage of some MD-PhD programs is that you can get funding for the MD side. If it is what you want to do, saving 100k USD isn't a bad thing. If it isn't what you want, trading a few years of an MD salary for 100k is a bad investment.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It depends a lot on the kind of research you envisage doing. Since you say that you want to go into academia, I'll look at it as "what added value does an MD provide". My understanding of these things is that if you want to do almost anything patient facing, having an MD makes it a lot easier. Others have mentioned access to certain kinds of grants as well. But for example if you plan to work with flies or mouse models, then getting an MD in addition might not be a good time/money trade off.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/19 | 892 | 3,614 | <issue_start>username_0: What is the significance of undergraduate grades (2.6/4.0) after 5 years of work experience. Do they still carry a value? If your job is not research oriented, e.g. for me I am a software developer on various enterprise Java technologies, how should I project myself to admission committees?
What are your suggestions for me? Getting non degree classes BEFORE APPLYING etc.? Currently, I am in Turkey and I want to enter US Job Market possibly after a MS CS, but if I like I can continue with a Ph.D. So I am an international applicant.<issue_comment>username_1: How much grades matter depends on the institution you apply to. The larger the department or company, the *more* grades will matter, because they will likely be used as an initial screening criterion to "whittle down" the pool. A GPA below 3.0 is not going to help, and at some places, will earn you an instant rejection, work after graduation notwithstanding.
However, if the review is "holistic," and you have outstanding letters from your recommenders, then the impact of the GPA may be lessened. (It will not be completely overlooked, but at the least it won't be a criterion for "bouncing" you without further consideration.)
I should also point out that after graduating, depending upon who you work for, your GPA may still matter. At a start-up or small company, it may not be such a big deal, but I've worked for several large-scale employers who had rather strict GPA cutoffs (well above 3.0 for both undergraduate *and* graduate degrees!). If you were way under this level, it was just not in the hiring manager's interest to spend the time necessary to defend the hire, versus selecting a candidate with a better record. So you may be able to overcome your academic record, but you won't be able to bury it completely.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me add a few points to username_1's answer.
Whether your work experience counts as positive or negative *also* depends on where you apply. You express interest in a PhD, which suggests that you are aiming for a research masters degree (with a thesis) and not a professional masters degree (just more classes). These two degrees are [**very** different](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/222/65). For admission to a *research* MS program, your non-research work experience is unlikely to count in your favor. Your work experience is much more likely to help if you apply to a professional MS program. On the other hand, professional MS degrees are usually considered terminal, *not* as preparation for PhD.
It is possible to move from industry to a research degree program with a low GPA and industry experience—[I did it myself](http://3dpancakes.typepad.com/ernie/2005/03/re_phd_with_low.html)—but you will need strong evidence in your application that counteracts your low grades. Specifically:
* You shold take the GRE — both the general and the CS subject test — **and do *really, really* well**, at least in the 80th percentile. This is direct evidence that you're *smart* and that you know the field, counteracting the negative evidence in your transcript. If you take the GRE and *don't* do well, step back, study hard for a few months, and take it again. (Yes, this can get expensive.)
* Your recommendation letters must imply **strong potential for research aptitude**, not just your coding ability or your ability to work in a team. You need to tell your letter-writers to address this issue directly; otherwise, they almost certainly won't.
* Finally, you should consider applying to take courses as a non-degree student.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/12/19 | 949 | 4,002 | <issue_start>username_0: The head of our department is writing a letter of recommendation for me for MD-PhD (MSTP) programs. I have two graduate level classes with him. He is very busy and writes letters regularly for students. I want to make sure that he does not end up using a canned letter.
I will be sending him my C.V., Cover Letter, and letter of intention. What else should I provided? He knows me in a classroom setting--I have not done research in his lab.<issue_comment>username_1: Send him information about the program and department you are applying to. Also ask him/her if they might know someone in the department you are applying to. It might be beneficial to name that contact person in the cover letter. Finally provide a deadline.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You won't find a better or more complete answer to this question than the one given [here](http://www.siam.org/news/news.php?id=1777), by Professor <NAME>. Here is the key paragraph:
>
> Likely reference writers (for instance, well-known professors of core courses) are sought out by many well-qualified candidates. To ensure that such a writer is well primed to execute your reference efficiently, you should create a self-contained packet containing all the information the author will need to dispatch the reference in one sitting: (1) contact information for the recipient of the letter, (2) a description of the position and application closing date, (3) your own application essays and cover letter, (4) a resume, (5) relevant transcripts and scores, and (6) an explanation of the niche of the writer! It is very useful, as a reference writer, to receive a reminder along the following lines: "<NAME>, your letter will be the one that comments most authoritatively about my analytical ability, my promptness in completing projects, and my reasons for wanting to pursue X next fall. Remember that you gave me an A– in partial differential equations two years ago and it was your suggestion that led to my summer at Los Alamos with Y." You should provide this packet in both hard and soft copy. Writers of lots of references maintain files that may be hard or soft, or both, and you should make it easy for those writers to locate your files quickly for subsequent updating and future requests.
>
>
> Some faculty write many dozens of letters of reference during peak months, and they may even ask candidates for sample text to be incorporated into letters, to ensure that they capture their niches. You should not be flustered at such a request, and should not be modest in complying. You should be aware, though, that your words will not pass directly into the delivered product; they will be used simply to get the author's juices flowing following the formulaic paragraphs of the letter.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: When I agree to write a letter of recommendation for a student, I ask him/her for the information listed [here](http://www.math.hmc.edu/~orrison/recs/), including most of what David mentioned, as well as a self-assessment of the student's strengths and weaknesses and a list of long-term career goals.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Give your letter-writer a packet containing:
* A copy of your transcript (showing what courses you've taken and the grades you've gotten).
* A copy of your personal statement or other essays that go with your applications.
* A brag sheet, with reminders of things your letter writer might want to mention. This might include significant acomplishments. It should also include reminders of interactions you've had with the professor (e.g., you may remember that you suggested I study with wibbly wobbets do or don't wangle their wuckets; see my research paper, where I found that they do, but only on Tuesdays; or, you may remember that I solved two of the optional bonus problems in your class).
* A list of places where you are applying, and the deadline for each. Highlight the first deadline.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/19 | 1,321 | 5,843 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student at a fairly large university, and I have twice taught a 200 level course for my department. The course is a new course that I developed. All of the lecture and lab content for this course was developed from scratch. As I will be graduating shortly (*fingers crossed*), a faculty member is scheduled to take over this course. My question is, "should I pass my course content on to said faculty?" I am primarily concerned about passing my slides on verbatim. Some issues I am concerned about are my indebtedness to the department (I developed some content while a TA and some while an adjunct.), ownership of the slides (What rights do I have to my content?), and distribution of content (How can I prevent the material from being further distributed?). I am interested in the issue of sharing content in general and not just in this one instance. Any guidance is much appreciated!
edit - as a colleauge of mine pointed out, I think there is a power imbalance issue as well. The faculty at my university are generally disinclined to share material with graduate students. Most grad students have to develop their own content. On the other hand, grad students are being asked to pass on material to faculty.<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion: **Yes, you should certainly pass over all course material**.
My colleague took over a course from another colleague who had left. My colleague know much less about the subject than the one who had left, so putting together a good course was a challenge for him. In theory, he had passed over all course material, but in practice, it was not very well organised, and my colleague ended up having to build it mostly from scratch.
As you have probably experienced, the first time you give a course is **by far** the most work, because you have to create everything from scratch. It helps enormously to have access to earlier course material. You lose very little by giving away course material. It's probably not publishable anyway — and if it is, passing it on to the next doesn't disqualify you from publishing it as a review or textbook, because passing it on is not a publication.
The only situation I can imagine where it would be problematic is if the person who you pass it on to claims it as their own and incorporates it in a review paper or textbook. But if you have any trust for the person, they won't do that, and it's much better to simply make all the course material available. Probably for the entire world.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In some cases, ownership may be defined in your contract. In the US, intellectual property law usually assigns ownership of works created during the course of expected duties of employment to the employer. The employee may or may not retain ownership, depending on the contract that was signed.
Your institution may also have ownership over all course materials, since you created them while you were an employee doing expected duties (teaching). Thus, they can do whatever they want with them, including assigning, licensing, or selling their ownership. Your ownership, however, would remain intact, if you had ownership. Your ownership cannot be reassigned or sold without your permission or under court order. You may have already give permission waiving ownership by signing your contract.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Complementing the other answers, that are more specific to the text in your question (being a TA and giving up the material), I'll add how I "roll" as a faculty member with my teaching assistants after 10+ years.
I have amassed a lot of material for several of the first-year courses I was "stuck with" in the beginning. It's true that some academic tradition is to ask TAs to develop their own material without any sharing from faculty. Some faculty I have spoken with feel it's how a TA builds character; others say it's a way to see if a TA has potential as a researcher; others say it's simply *tradition*.
In my case, my courses are too important to have TAs test out their worth and possibly crash and burn due to lack of support (it happened once that the students revolted, and this problem fell back into my lap, being the faculty member in charge of the course). So I learned my lesson to hand over everything, with the caveat that the TA know the material in the books and not think of the material as being a "pass" at teaching the course. I always encourage TAs to re-do their presentation slides, only because presenting is a personal style, and it's risky to present someone else's material with confidence.
After I started sharing, one TA added some exercises that were well done, but he didn't want to give them back, saying it was his property and he was underpaid, etc. Fair enough, since I didn't state any expectations when I gave out my material.
So, now I will give my material out to any new TAs who sign an informal contract (email response) saying that by accepting the material, they agree to improve on it (add exercises, examples, exam questions, multiple-choice questions, analyses, etc.) and render it back to the community (me). This has worked well with many TAs, and frankly the cooperation factor is very high.
Another practical aspect: I ask TAs to cite sources of material they borrow (just as they do in their research reports). The course material is already full of citations, so it's natural. In the distant past, some undergrad students raised a stink (rightly!) about TAs who copy/paste figures/text from web sources without citing them in Powerpoint. In one case, a TA was fired because he wouldn't change this behavior.
As for *how* to share, today I'm using Google Drive (our school has the academic license). In the past I used Dropbox and both ways are very practical.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/20 | 2,417 | 9,992 | <issue_start>username_0: I am starting my PhD in Computer Science next semester in a relatively small department (around 20 faculty members). I have been to the university a few times and I noted the collaboration among students is minimal. My prospective supervisor, most likely, is willing to help me in any research activity I propose that will increase the number of projects and publications with collaboration among students.
Thus, I am asking for different suggestions/tips of activities one can do or propose to increase the collaboration and the knowledge exchange among students/faculty members.
My question is on two levels:
**1. What activities/set ups can a PhD student do/propose at the group level?** (i.e. between you and other students with the same supervisor). FYI, the group is around 10 students. My supervisor is going to set up a group presentation every two weeks.
**2. What activities/proposals/set ups can one suggest at the departmental level?** (I was thinking of a weekly talk over coffee for graduate students in the department.)<issue_comment>username_1: There are so many group-binding activities that you can imagine… I’ll try to list just a few ideas specific to an academic setting:
* **[Journal club](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_club)**, the obvious choice
* **Friday’s coffee and pastries**, or **Tuesday’s four o’ clock tea** sessions, followed by flash updates (news from the group, recent awards, publications, maybe one existential technical question that someone raises, etc.)
* **Graduate students seminars**: organizing seminars specifically tailored for graduate students (but inviting all those who may want to come, of course). Possible topics include early career path presentation and advice, motivational speakers (e.g. <NAME> from [PhD comics](http://www.phdcomics.com/speaking.php) fame), teaching skills (for TA’s), etc.
* Encourage participation in group life: elect students’ representative to lab council or other local boards, hold regular meetings to talk about the practical aspects of your life, organize activities centered around your office space (cleaning day, fire safety day, first responder training).
* Participate in competitions in (or near) your field, if there are any (competitions, olympiads, etc.)
All events, even if some seem only remotely relevant to the pursuit of your academic happiness, will increase group cohesion and maintain a good research atmosphere.
For all such events, favour informal settings and try to take as little time as possible. People already have heavy schedules, and they can make room for small activities but probably not a weekly two-hours setting. [Brown bag seminar](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_bag_seminar) is one way of achieving this.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I just started working in a small lab a few months ago. I don't know if the way our lab is functioning is *right* or even *good*, but I like it, it works for me and I feel good here, so let me explain the lab dynamic here.
Just to give some context, the lab is so small that the division to project teams (although it exists) does not make sense for any informal activity. At any given time, there is 7 - 10 PhD students in the lab, maybe 1 or 2 exchange students/interns, and we have some PhD students that are in the lab only a day or two a week. Also, the lab is almost circular, all the offices are very close and we have a habit working with open office doors.
The common topic denominator among all of us is "Computer Science" (very broad), although each of us can find one or two more student-people working a similar topic.
I find that **it's much easier for me to talk science to somebody I feel comfortable having a beer and a few laughs with as well**. Not saying that you have to get your lab drunk, but:
* in the morning, **the first one in makes the coffee**, and we linger in the lab-kitchen for 20-30 minutes until our eyes are open. Everybody is free to join, heavy coffee drinkers are almost always there, while the others wander in from time to time. Sometimes even the senior researchers have coffee with us.
* we all **go to lunch together** (partially cause we all have partially refunded meals in that resto). We have a guy who talks much and eats slow, so by the time everybody finishes, we usually spend a quality 30-40 minutes talking. We also do a *coffee after lunch*.
* When **somebody's leaving the lab**, we try to buy some trinkets (last time it was 1euro/person), organize **small going away "party"** in the lab with juice and cookies, and **dinner followed by drinks** in the evening. Food setting is more inviting to the shy students, and after that the outgoing ones go have a few pints.
* Students sometimes just **wander in other student's offices** (usually in the lazy afternoon hours) for a few words. This habit is nice because you feel less uneasy when you stroll into somebodies office to talk science, cause you're practically doing the same thing. As a less imposing version, we sometimes just **wave to each other while passing** in front of the office.
* When we have organized (boring) activities / administrative seminars / things that finish early, especially out of the lab, we try to go **sit for drinks** if we have time.
* the only nice idea *specifically targeted for professional exchange* we did was organize a **"PhD students day"** where we all presented our subjects in very basic streaks, from 10 - 15 minutes, so that everybody would know which students are working on interesting problems (for them).
* every project team has **team meetings at their own pace**, where we present our current research, recently accepted papers, exchange students present their topics or students that went to an exchange present what they did. My team does it usually two times a month, in a fairly casual setting.
Now that I mentioned all this *procrastinating*, let me say something that's always been true for me among Computer Science people wherever I went (studied in Croatia, Austria and now France, and had some holidays with CS people): **you can't stop computer scientists talking about tech**. Tech talk bleeds through beer, we eat some of it for lunch and drink it in our coffee. When we're happy about our work, we feel comfortable enough to share it with people around us. When we're angry and stuck, we are all around people who saw us in various kinds of settings, so we don't feel that uncomfortable being grumpy and complaining.
All this said, for some more context: I'm a PhD student in France. I have a feeling that the work environment here is much much more relaxed that in the States, and than a lot of European countries as well. They seem to believe that if you do everything slowly and relaxed (except a day before a deadline), you will do a good job. So, my advice might be only applicable to similar work cultures, but I still think there's some good things there, because, at the end of the day, we all enjoy our times in the lab.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm not sure I should be contributing to a list like this, but other people seem to think it's okay, so... in addition to what has been suggested in other answers, one thing that I've found quite useful is to have a small research discussion group among the PhD students.
The way this works is that you get about 10-15 students together from different fields within the department, to meet every week or every other week for an hour or less. At each meeting, one of the group will talk about his or her recent research. These talks are normally "beyond informal" in the sense that no prior preparation at all is expected; effectively, you're just explaining what you do to your friends. It works best when the "audience" members feel free to ask any stupid questions that may occur to them, which means two things: it's ideal if the people meeting already know each other in a non-academic context, and also important to do it without faculty involvement so that nobody is tempted to try to impress a professor. Having students from a variety of different fields of research means that you can expect to have some pretty basic questions at each presentation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A few more points:
* as undergrad students, we had a campfire to celebrate the end of labwork/seminars/lectures.
* now (on the teaching side) we have a campfire to celebrate the end of labwork/seminar/lectures.
(it usually includes some birthdays as well)
* in one institute we had quite regularly after-work activities like a bike tour, going swimming, bowling, Xmas market etc. happened. They were "scheduled" every once in a while, so no problem if you'd like to come in general, but just not that day. You could just join in next time (however, next morning at coffee you'd of course hear what you did miss). This included everyone in the institute but the big boss.
* (Sometimes people signed up for university sports courses together.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I am part of an interdisciplinary NSF IGERT program on Water Diplomacy which supports 15 or so PhD students across 4+ departments. The program has done a commendable job of making opportunities for team building, collaboration, and the emergence of happy accidents within the group. Here are a few things to add to the running list of answers:
* Weekly colloquiums where one student presents their work for an hour, followed by half an hour of collective brainstorming, critique, and discussion. Light breakfast provided.
* Annual weekend retreats to revisit program priorities, assets, and areas for improvement. We cook meals, have fires, and chat.
* Monthly evening workshops/round-table discussions on a theme - this year's series is on civic engagement. Dinner provided.
* Share office space. While not uncommon for PhD research groups, it's unique to have students across multiple departments sharing space.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/20 | 1,294 | 4,699 | <issue_start>username_0: I was reading about a “young researcher award” recently being attributed in my field to a colleague who is 40 years old (and has had a permanent research position for 12 years now). It may be viewed as borderline ridiculous, so I must ask: in this context, how young is typically “young”? For the purpose of this special projects/grants/awards, how do research and funding organizations define “young”?<issue_comment>username_1: The EU has the program [FET OPEN Young Explorers](http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/fet-open/ye_en.html), where young is defined as:
>
> A project must be led by a young researcher, and the leadership by young researchers of all work packages is also required. No more than six years should have elapsed between the award of a Ph.D. (or equivalent) for each such young researcher and the date of submission of the short proposal.
>
>
>
I have also seen postdoc position reserved for people who obtained their PhD less than 5 years ago, but I can't find the reference back.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: "Young" does in fact have many different connotations. For example, in the [ERC Starting Grant](http://erc.europa.eu/starting-grants) program, applicants can have been out of graduate school for as many as *twelve* years before applying as a "Starter" (or "Consolidator"). So technically, they're still "young," according to that program, but not what we would normally think of as "young."
But, in general, "young" can refer in terms of age (in which case I've normally seen the cutoff be about 35 or so), or in terms of relative experience in the field (typically five years, although it can be shorter or longer, depending on the field or country).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In economics, the most prestigious award outside the nobel prize is probably the John Bates Clark Medal (most winners go on to eventually receive the Nobel too). It is awarded biannually to only one person, so in a sense is even more prestigious than the Nobel (which is awarded annually to typically more than 1); to who is deemed the leading 'young' researcher under 40. So 40 as a cutoff for 'young' doesn't surprise me much, but there are obviously no hard rules.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The Fields medal also has an age cutoff of 40 (<NAME> being the most recent example of someone who missed the age cutoff for an otherwise sure award).
Grant agencies usually define "young" in terms of "years since Ph.D", or "years in academic position" with the typical cutoff being 6 or so.
Note that while for most things\*, 40 might not be considered "young", in many disciplines you might only get your first academic position near that age (especially in biology).
\* politics being the other venue where 40 would be considered young :)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Here are some awards presented to people aged 35 and below:
1. The [Young Scientist Awards](http://www.a-star.edu.sg/tabid/443/default.aspx) of the Singapore National Academy of Science
2. The [Young Scientist of the Year Award](http://www.esrf.eu/UsersAndScience/users_org/YoungScientistAward) of the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility
3. The [Young Scientist Award](http://csirhrdg.res.in/ysa1.htm) of the Council of Scientific & Industrial Research
4. The [WMO Research Award for Young Scientists](http://www.wmo.int/pages/about/awards/youngscientistsaward.html) of the World Meteorological Organization
5. The [Young Scientist Award](http://epdic13.grenoble.cnrs.fr/spip.php?article18) of the European Powder Diffraction Conference
There are many more; just use a search engine to search for the terms *"young scientist" award 35*.
A similar list of awards can be found with a search for *"young scientist" award 40*.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: Sometimes what is still considered "young" also depends on the specific situation of the individual: I've seen exceptions described in the areas of paternity leaves, compulsory military service, or receiving additional clinical training.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: The NSF [CAREER](http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=503214) award (Faculty Early Career Development Program) is a grant for "young" scientists, and requires that winners have the title "assistant professor." This typically means that the person has spent < 6 years in a tenure track academic position. Of course, such a person need not be "young" -- someone who worked 2 years in industry before grad school, spent 6 years doing a PhD, 2 years of postdoc, and then spent 5 years as an assistant professor might win one of these awards and be nearly 40.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/21 | 978 | 3,906 | <issue_start>username_0: *Originally I conceived of posting a "Roadmap for researching x" but I assume that would be too localized for this site.*
**Background:** After much dilly-dallying, I have finally zoned in to pursue lifetime in Taoist research. I have studied mathematical philosophy, cultural anthropology, symbolic logic and enrolled in Eastern studies class for next semester. I understand the professor for latter class would be an excellent source of reference but currently semester is closed.
**Problems facing:** As I learned in English class it is important to take copious notes during research even if it means 24 hours so I am currently photographing everything that pertains to Taoism. But due to the complex nature of the subject itself and the concept of *wu-wei*, action in non-action, I am unsure as to how to approach research. I understand if I pursue degree in this field I should familiarize myself with the language and journals and pretty much everything that is related to it. This brings me to my original point:
**Question:** What would be a good strategy to do research on Taoism? Do I conceive of a thesis and work downwards from it? Or do I start from the scratch - so to speak- and bootstrap my way to a knowledge base. Problem with latter and given the complex nature is if I start with no thesis, then it would be an aimless wandering. But- then again, isn't that what Taoism is all about?
**EDIT**: In lieu of JeffE's comment below I am rephrasing the original question:
>
> During a research, is it a good idea to start with a working thesis as early as possible?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: In general, I agree with JeffE. Both top down and bottom up.
In the case of Taoism, there is more - how proficient is your Chinese?
You said *pursue lifetime in Taoist research*. I am not sure you can do that without knowledge in Chinese language equivalent to at least masters degree in Chinese.
Taoism is rooted from Laozi's original text *Daodejing*. Reference [Taoism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoism). Most native Chinese speakers do not understand that text. If you want to conduct life time research in Taoism, that book is a must read and must understand. Without fully understanding that text, you are at best a second class researcher in Taoism.
I am a native Chinese speaker. How much do I understand the text? Less than 5%. If I spend 20 years or more on it, I might be able to understand 80% of it. Actually, I am bluffing. Some people contribute his whole life in it and then claimed that he only understood less than half.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I can't help at all specifically on the Taoism part, but as an answer to your final question:
>
> During a research, is it a good idea to start with a working thesis as early as possible?
>
>
>
You are talking about a thesis, and posting here, so I presume you want to do research in academical environment.
In my experience, you have **Bachelor and Master years** for establishing a **broad knowledge base** and identifying your interests.
Once you start **as a PhD student**, you get a **research topic**, but since it is research, it is **subject to changes**. The topic was defined before you actually immersed in the subject, so while you are working towards that goal while pursuing your thesis, the goal can change as you learn new things.
Oh, and you really don't need to familiarize yourself "with the language and journals and *pretty much everything* that is related to it" *before* pursuing a degree.
*Note:* The precise names of stages and the line between *broad* and *focused* research might be different elsewhere, but I think both phases should exist. In case you're aiming to start directly at a "focused research" phase, my (subjective) advice would be to take some time before to do some broad research on your own.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/22 | 361 | 1,501 | <issue_start>username_0: Am I breaking some kind of rule if I'm adding the arxiv link to the bibitem for an article that's published in a journal? I thought obviously not until I noticed that (link to arxiv) and (page number in journal) are quite mutually exclusive.<issue_comment>username_1: Many copy editors will remove arXiv links to published papers, but usually they'll put them back in if you insist.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **No.** I think giving the arxiv link is *fine*. One alternative is to have two bibitem entries, one for the journal version and another for the arxiv version. I find it valuable to include the journal reference, because that shows that the article has been refereed (so its claims gain legitimacy). But I also see the value of including the arxiv version, particularly if the journal is hard to access.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Technically, an arxiv version of a paper is different from a journal version. This can be a problem if you (for example) cite a particular theorem or lemma in a math paper that has a different number (or doesn't exist) in the arxiv version.
You didn't mention why you're adding the arxiv link. If you wish to add a link to a freely accessible document, then you could add a note in the text to that effect and cite the arxiv version in addition to the journal version. Otherwise, if you merely want a link to an online version, then you should be using the DOI link for the journal.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/22 | 932 | 3,480 | <issue_start>username_0: In an academic CV, how much information do you put in the education field for each degree (assume the person is a post-grad/early career)?
### Option 1: Degree, Specialization, Department, University, Year, Advisor, Thesis
>
> **Ph. D.** in Foo science (2012)
>
> Some Named School of Science, University of Bar,
>
> Thesis: *Qux control in Baz networks*
>
> Advisor: <NAME>. Public
>
>
>
### Option 2: Degree, Specialization, Department, University, Year
>
> **Ph. D.** in Foo science (2012)
>
> Some Named School of Science, University of Bar
>
>
>
>
### Option 3: Degree, Specialization, University, Year
>
> **Ph. D.** in Foo Engineering, University of Bar (2012)
>
>
>
>
### Option 4: Degree, University, Year
>
> **Ph. D.**, University of Bar (2012)
>
>
>
>
I've often seen options 1 or 2 and in some cases, where there is a bigger body of work (publications, grants, etc.) to speak for the person than their degree, I've seen option 3. Option 4 is rarer, but one common trait among those that I've seen it with is that they are now working in a field different from what they did their PhD in and do not wish to bring attention to that (lest it hurt any chances). For example, a PhD in Physics now working in Computational Biology. I think CGPAs are pretty silly when it comes to research positions, but I'm not sure if I'm the only one.
However, I don't know what the expectations of the person seeing my CV are. I don't mean random visitors to my website or corporate HRs, but other academics who might be interested in working with me. Granted, if they're an academic, they'll probably focus on my publications more, but there's also *something* that's expected from a CV.<issue_comment>username_1: I would agree that option 1 is the most likely option for someone who is just coming out of graduate school, and is looking to continue in the same field for a while.
The department *should* be listed when relevant—that is, if the program in which the degree is awarded is different from the specialization in some where. For instance, if your PhD is in engineering, but the department conferring it is materials science, you should say something like number 2, rather than number 3.
I don't think there are many instances in which number 4 is very useful, because it looks like you're hiding what you did for a PhD. There are very few circumstances I can think of where this would work—except if the job call specifically required a degree from a particular subset of disciplines, to which you don't belong. But then something will probably come to light from the letters of recommendation, or from some other part of the application.
So, I'd stick with options 1 or 2, for the reasons I've outlined above.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First of all, I would never use option 4 since the most important information (subject!) is missing and in my opinion it is more important than the school or the year.
To answer your question: Maybe a combination of the option 1-3 would be appropriate in such a sense that the latest degree is used with option 1 and the oldest degree is used with option 2 or 3.
For example: If you have a PhD and a Master degree in some subject, no one is interested in the name of your Bachelor Thesis or your advisor. People then are normally interested only if you did your Bachelor in the same subject and maybe in which year.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/23 | 952 | 4,281 | <issue_start>username_0: Would it be ethical for students working on the same team to include in their Ph.D. theses results arising from joint publications, ending up in different dissertations containing almost identical chapters?
Of course, the students should at least mention that the common chapters are excerpted from a joint publication. However, wouldn't a significant overlap at least indicate that the students have been unable to come up with enough strong and coherent results to make their own independent dissertations?<issue_comment>username_1: I think for a PhD thesis it is important the writer has enough original and new contributions to earn the PhD degree. When two PhD's work closely together, and write joint publications this can only work if it is clear that both PhD's have made new and significant contributions.
For example, in a publication which has both lab experiments and numerical modeling it is easy to see that both the lab-PhD and the numerical-PhD have done different things, which are put together jointly into a publication. In this case I would think it ethical that both PhD's get their degree based on the same publications. If, however, the overlap is not countered by the fact that the PhD's each have their distinct niche, I would not find it ethical to let two people get their degree based on the same work.
In the PhD theses the publications could be used as such by both PhD, but they need to have a different introduction and synthesis chapter as they worked on different aspects of the joint papers. In addition, I would explain the situation and how the collaboration worked in the preface of both theses.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You should check **your department guideline**. In mine, only articles where the candidate is first author, and has accomplished most of the work (you need to provide letter signed by other authors) can be used. Also, it can only be used in one thesis.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: One case of this that's getting a bit old but was highly influential in artificial intelligence was <NAME> and <NAME> (PhDs at the MIT AI Lab in the late 1980s). They did everything together, but wrote completely different dissertations. They agreed in advance how they would divvy up the output.
Since a PhD has to have a novel contribution, I think this is the only way it can work. You specify your contributions in the introduction and conclusion, and these can only be contributions by one person, for one dissertation.
Personally, I had a little bit of overlapping text in two of my dissertations (which for bizarre reasons came out nearly the same time), but it was only the literature review, which at the time I didn't think of as a contribution, and I clearly stated the overlap in the later dissertation. Also, I didn't claim that the thing I was best known for at that time (an action selection mechanism) was a contribution to *either* dissertation, just to be certain there could be no claim I'd made overlapping contributions (One was in Psychology & one was in Systems AI, so they really were pretty different.)
Basically, by the time you are ready for a PhD, you should be able to make any number of contributions. So being productive and publishing articles is the main thing to worry about, and then secondarily following through, and following the rules, so you get your degree. Your dissertation is not a documentation of your life's work – it's just one coherent document making a very clear academic contribution. Hopefully two good students working together would make more than enough contributions that they can divide them up and each write interesting dissertations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In math at Berkeley this varied by advisor. Some advisors insisted that theses consist only of solo work, while others did not. My thesis consisted almost entirely of collaborative work (though with different collaborators), and I think one chapter may have also appeared in a collaborator's thesis. The advisor shouldn't sign off on the thesis if the student hasn't done enough work to deserve a PhD, but if you're going to do most of your work collaboratively after grad school it makes sense to me to do so during grad school.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/24 | 1,716 | 6,850 | <issue_start>username_0: Where can I find a database of impact factors where self-citation has been removed? A journal's self-citations are defined as those citations by that journal's papers towards other papers in the same journal.
The reason I want to know this is to know which journals are engaged in [coercive citation](http://www.sciencemag.org/content/335/6068/542) so that I know which journals I should avoid.<issue_comment>username_1: **Update from March 2016**: it seems like ISI Knowledge offers citation counts with person-level self-citations taken out. Any of that should be treated as experimental, of course. Don't know if this could work for a journal.
---
I don't think any of the existing systems take out the self-citations. The publishers and journals are not interested in seeing reduced impact factors, so few editorial boards and fewer yet commercial publishers would be interested in anybody producing such rankings. If a discipline has its independent referencing and citations systems, they might be interested in such more objective analysis -- e.g., economists have their CitEc (Citations in Economics), a part of RePEc (Research Papers in Economics), which does track self-citations (see the 2012 Nobel prize winners, [<NAME>](http://citec.repec.org/p/r/pro40.html) and [<NAME>](http://citec.repec.org/p/s/psh559.html) as examples... the first one has as many self-citations as the second one, total citations). I would venture a guess that mathematicians might have a similar system. But I doubt that natural or social sciences do.
The high impact journals are obviously important for publishing, getting good academic jobs and getting tenured. However, impact factor may only tell a part of the story, and some disciplines have reputable journals that may not have the highest possible IFs. Let me take again economics as an example that I am familiar with. In most US departments, you'd get tenured if you have a paper in either American Economics Review, Quarterly Journal of Economics, or Econometrica. (The QJE is often said to mostly publish MIT and Harvard folks.) AER is only 19th in [this list of impact factors](http://www.socialcapitalgateway.org/content/ranking/ranking-economics-journals-based-impact-factor) (which may be as good as any other list that's not password protected by ISI), and I have never heard about some of these journals. The AER's impact factor of 2.5 is not even funny for a biologist seeking *Science* or *Nature* publications, though -- the impact factors of the latter are what, 30 or so?
I work in industry and tend to care little about the journals outside of my area (statistics); generally, statistics journals tend to have IFs between 0.25 and 4. The reality of my particular field (survey research) is that people just submit their paper to proceedings of the annual conferences and move on with their paying projects, and don't have the time to BS back and forth with the reviewers. There are people in academia who need to publish-or-perish, so you would see some typical academic papers with rather small contributions to the knowledge, but their authors either have their own time or slave labor force grad students to write these up.
As a guiding rule of what journals to avoid, you can start with commercially published journals and respect the professional organizations publish their journals themselves, without Wiley or Elsevier grabbing them as a source of income... although I can imagine that coercive citations is what the editorial boards insist on, which may or may not correlate strongly with who publishes a given journal. I have received requests to cite the given journal more (this is a problem for disciplines with an overproduction of journals fighting each other; again, in my industry, there are probably four or five decent ones, and they don't need to fight), but tended to ignore them.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The SciVerse Citation Tracker service, available to anyone with a Scopus subscription, allows it to exclude self-citations. However, it is not designed to evaluate journals, but rather to review citations to a particular author or field. Both the Journal Impact Factor (IF) computed by Thomson Reuters and the Scientific Journal Rankings (SJR) computed in Scopus by Elsevier include self-citations. I am not aware of any other database that excludes them.
And yet, I wouldn't use any bibliometric indicator as a measure of a journal's reputation, but rather trust the advice of experienced colleagues.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know of any impact factor database for which citations from a journal to itself have been removed. One reason why such lists aren't popular (and may not exist at all) is that they would distort the statistics of specialized journals. In a subfield with a small number of journals, one would expect a substantial fraction of the citations to come from the same journal. That does not indicate a problem, and it would be unfair to these journals to judge them without those citations. (Comparing impact factors between journals in different areas is already foolish, since publication and citation practices vary greatly, but there's no point in making it even worse.)
I am skeptical that such a list would be useful for identifying patterns of coercive citation. Thomson Reuters already tries to detect these problems and [punish journals](http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2012/06/29/citation-cartel-journals-denied-2011-impact-factor/). I'm sure the community could do an even better job of detecting fraud if they opened up their entire database, but they of course have strong commercial reasons not to do that. If the current level of fraud checking is being done at all competently, then providing this additional list would not help much.
Incidentally, as I understand it, the state of the art in citation fraud is [networks of several journals publishing review articles citing each other's papers](http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2012/04/10/emergence-of-a-citation-cartel/).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Let me add a new answer to an old question for posterity's sake. Thompsons Reuters Journal Citations recently (I believe in the past year or two) started making this information available. See an example below:
Of course making this data available does not address the "citation cartels" mentions in username_3's answer, or editors writing papers with rampant citations to their journals, [as in the case of IJNSNS discussed here](http://www.ams.org/notices/201103/rtx110300434p.pdf). The data above is for the IJNSNS case. (Note the editorial board has changed, which I imagine coincides with the decline in impact factor.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/24 | 496 | 2,125 | <issue_start>username_0: I know a student in a linguistics master's program (in East Asia). He told me that in his country, most master's programs require students to publish a certain number of papers in academic journals in order to graduate. I want to study a linguistics-related degree in the US. Is such a requirement common there as well?
* In the US, does "thesis-option" generally imply that one "must publish a thesis to graduate" or does it just mean "must write a thesis"?
* Are such publishing requirements common enough in graduate programs in the US that it should be a question I ask schools when I apply?<issue_comment>username_1: I've never heard of a publication requirement for a masters degree in the USA or UK. There is not even a novelty requirement for a masters dissertation, that's what makes it different from a PhD. Obviously publishing is a good idea if you want to continue on to a PhD, it makes your CV look much stronger and shows your promise as a researcher. But frankly, in the UK at least there is no time to publish before you finish your dissertation (Masters degrees are very compressed one year degrees) and most publications follow the formal completion of the degree.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It probably depends on the school. I don't remember seeing this as a requirement for any of the US schools I looked at.
At my school in the US, our Master's thesis must be published by the university and presented at a graduate forum held twice a year. We are also encouraged to present at conferences or submit to technical journals, but that is optional.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: In my experience it varies by discipline and institution. I know of some MS programs where a student might graduate without publishing, but this would be viewed as a very poor performance. I know of others where publishing or even presenting at a conference would set you apart as a very successful student. If you want to go on for a PhD, then I would encourage you to make publishing at the MS level a goal. It will help in moving on to a HD program.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/24 | 856 | 2,958 | <issue_start>username_0: I am considering studying a master's degree in England, however, the price system is quite unlike the system in the US, at least in wording, so I am uncertain how to estimate the costs.
The schools I looked at listed the fees in one of two ways:
>
> Cost (2013-14)
>
>
> £3,000
>
>
>
or
>
> Fee
>
>
> UK/EU: £1,000
>
>
> Part-Time: £500
>
>
> International: £4,000
>
>
> Part-Time: £2,000
>
>
>
Most schools require that master's degree students complete four 30-credit modules, each taking 8-10 weeks, depending on the school, as well as one 60-credit dissertation.
* Under the price system used in England, how can I estimate the total cost of tuition for an entire master's degree?
* Do schools in England often apply additional costs, such as registration fees, technology fees, renovation fees, or special course fees, as is typical of US schools?<issue_comment>username_1: First work out whether the price you're given is per module (such as is done by the Open University) or per year (common for most other universities).
If the former, find out how many points you'll need for the degree you want, and the number of points per module. And calculate accordingly. So if it's £1000 per module, one module is 15 point, and you need 90 points, then your total cost is £1000 x 90 / 15 = £6000
If the latter, multiply the fees by the course length. So, for example, if it's £2000 per year part time, and will take you three years to do it part time, the total fee cost will be 3 x £2000 = £6000.
As you've seen, the fees will vary depending on whether you're a UK/EU citizen or not. International is lazy shorthand for non-EU. There may be a residency criterion as well as a nationality criterion (e.g. Bachelors degrees at Scottish universities).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Most UK Masters degrees are a single year. Even if for some reason you get an extension (e.g. to finish your dissertation), you will only be charged tuition for the taught year, maybe a small fee for remaining registered. But the International fee will just be it (unless you are from the EU, in which case the home fee is it), and normally includes any bench fees.
Note the fixed tuition costs matters less for Masters students, but is a huge win over US degrees for PhDs – you normally only pay 3 years tuition even if you take 4 or even 5 years to finish.
A part time degree will probably take about twice as long and you will have to pay the fee for double the number of years. If you are legally allowed to work in the UK, or you can telecommute to a part-time job in your home country, this can be a win. Though keep in mind that the cost of living is very high in the UK and will probably exceed your tuition even if you are full time.
Anyway, UK universities are very keen to get Masters students, if you just email the contact for a university they will give you full numbers.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/25 | 482 | 2,029 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it just me or are the published articles a strain on the eyes in general? Has there been(/shouldn't there be) a study on optimal font sizes for reading?<issue_comment>username_1: Journal prescribed fonts haven't really caught up with the digital era. They were optimized for a time of print, where each page had a price. Unfortunately, researchers are required to use fonts specified by the publisher at a conference. But many people usually upload a more readable version on a web page or the arxiv - 11pt tends to be reasonable.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a historical anachronism. The fonts are chosen for the print version of the journal. For a print version, if you use a smaller font, you can squeeze more text onto the same page and print the same paper on fewer pages -- which saves money. So, for print publications, the small font size arguably makes sense. However, today print is less important and the digital format is more important, but journal requirements haven't caught up to this fact.
For instance, in computer science, the ACM is a notorious offender: they require papers to use 9pt fonts, which are very small.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I prefer the old-fashioned way of reading papers: print it and read with text-marker, and I find the usual font sizes OK (sometimes too large when printing on A4 paper). Margins of ca. 4 cm per column are (would be) nice, though.
Monitor space is much too valuable for more than taking a glance which paper exactly I want to get from my collection. Where should I edit notes, do calculations and see graphs/images/man pages if most of the monitor is taken up by the paper?
I did print much less when I had 2 monitors, but at my new place I have only one. And anyways, no monitors can hold as much easily accessible information as a bunch of papers laid out on a large table.
(But I LaTeX my papers, so whoever wants larger fonts is welcome to rerun them with other settings).
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/25 | 643 | 2,834 | <issue_start>username_0: When I studied my bachelor's degree, my professors often let me write papers in whatever area I wanted, even if it was an area completely outside of their expertise. Within master's programs, is this still the case, or must students generally stay within the specific expertise of their professors or advisors?
In my particular situation, I want to study second language acquisition (SLA), however, none of the programs I can attend have professors knowledgeable in my particular language of focus. Is it likely that I'll face resistance from advisors in trying to write my research papers and thesis about a language which none of the school's faculty are familiar with?<issue_comment>username_1: A master's thesis is an original piece of work by the candidate on any topic that falls within the scope of the master's program. In principle, at least at my university, there is no formal requirement that the advisor be expert of the topic of the thesis, even if this would clearly help a lot from a student's perspective. Going for a topic outside of the professors' expertise requires a strong motivation on the candidate's side.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Whether an advisor will agree to supervise a master's thesis outside of their area of expertise depends on the advisor. It may also vary between fields or universities, but I believe the personal variance will be much higher, so the best way to find out is to ask a potential advisor.
As for whether it's a good idea, I see three issues.
1. You will not receive expert advice in your chosen area. Of course, there's a trade-off here: would you rather study what you love best without expert advice, or get better advising on another topic?
2. You may receive actively bad advice. To avoid this difficulty, it's important for you to read extensively and to choose an advisor who is open minded and flexible.
3. Your advisor may not write an enthusiastic letter of recommendation for you. Sometimes an advisor will let a student choose to do whatever they want, but when the advisor recommends the student, it becomes clear that the advisor is uninterested in the student's work and unimpressed by it. I've seen this cause trouble for several people, so I strongly recommend trying to find an advisor who is actually enthusiastic about your topic (even if it's not what they work on).
In your specific case, choosing to study second language acquisition in a language nobody on the faculty speaks sounds like only a mild concern (assuming you speak it fluently or have access to excellent informants), since I imagine much of the advising would be about research methodology or language acquisition theories, rather than language-specific issues. However, I don't know enough about this area to say for sure.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/25 | 1,952 | 8,491 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently received an application for a PhD position from someone who is already working as a postdoctoral associate. The difference in fields is not particularly large—I work in chemical engineering and materials science, while the applicant originally is coming from computational chemistry.
So the obvious question is, why would someone want to pursue a second doctoral degree when they already have one in a related field, and why would I, as a potential advisor, want to consider someone interested in doing this? (For instance, it seems obvious that the person wouldn't likely need as much training as a novice, but there would also be the challenge of trying to find such a person gainful employment afterwards.)<issue_comment>username_1: I've seen two reasons for this. The more worrisome reason is the one mentioned by EnergyNumbers in the comments, namely that some people just collect degrees. In particular, they may feel having two Ph.D.s would look exceptionally impressive, or they may be unable to settle on a specialization, or they may feel that getting another degree is somehow preferable to getting a job. These could be legitimate as personal desires, but they are counterproductive for a research career.
The other reason is to recover from a bad career start. Sometimes someone's grades keep them from getting into a good graduate program, or they face other constraints (geographical or financial) in their choice of programs, or they fail to connect well with their advisor. They may eventually get a Ph.D., but not under good circumstances, and a second Ph.D. might lead to a much better career. The difference between this case and the first case is that these students don't actually want a second Ph.D. as such. They regretfully feel they need one to achieve their career goals, but they wish it had been their first and only Ph.D.
Recovering from a bad start is a less worrisome reason to seek a second Ph.D., but of course the challenge is figuring out which students have moved beyond their past difficulties and which have not.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You didn't mention what country you are in or the relative standing of the two universities & supervisors involved. Sometimes people apply for a second PhD because their first one is not sufficiently well respected to get at good job.
Another reason is because the candidate really is just enjoying that stage of life. In the USA, one can often stay a PhD student for years in a top institution, but in other countries there are hard time limits. I also know of several people who took multiple PhDs at top universities just because they finished the first one too young to take a chair yet (and one person who didn't let that bother him & took a chair at 18, getting his father an office nearby!)
The most important question though is whether you want this person as a student – will they finish? Do they know what they are getting in to? If they have a PhD, they are in some sense a peer, and certainly should have a reputation. I would spend more time than usual pursuing the references, possibly with phone calls, and I would certainly talk at length with the candidate about whether they would really finish writing up a second time. I would only take them with exceptionally strong references from others and a very good personal narrative about why they want and would complete a second degree.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think its all about the jobs that the first PhD could not bring to them. I myself have a PhD from an Egyptian university, but it seems that nobody is willing to offer me a post-doc position because I don't have 10 journal papers with extremely large impact factor as a PhD student from an advanced country would have. Of course the conditions are very different between a university in Egypt and another one in the United States or Europe. That's why I will keep looking for another PhD from a very high ranked western university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I am from Africa. None of my degrees (Bachelors or Masters) were recognized in the UK, leaving me with no choice but to study for the same degrees again. Not sure if this applies to PhDs, but I can imagine a similar situation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: there are many reasons doing another phd. I have done a phd in chemistry, (one year postdoc and 2 years as a researcher in R&D). and today, applying for another phd. I have more than 10 papers (each one with impact higher than 2). what makes me to think for another phd, is not job, it is knowledge. actually, I have a position as a lecturer, and have been offered a position fro assistant prof. however, I prefer to gain more experience and knowledge as I can. so I am applying for a position in interdisciplinary field (material chemistry). considering my experience in chemistry, I would be more successful in the future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: One of the reason why someone would like to do another PhD could be attaining a degree and knowledge is allied field as most of the current research now a days are focusing on multidisciplinary application based approached. This off course has to do with the field you are in and in this case mine being nano-biotechnology. As far as the OP's question is concerned the applicant had a PhD in chemistry and now he want to move towards computational chemistry. How I see this is that chemistry is quite focused and has set boundaries but if he manages to enter the field of computational chemistry his scope widens as computational chemistry is not only applicable in chemistry but also has scopes in modelling, biotechnology, protein chemistry nano chemistry and so on.
Also it could be a reason that from the previous PhD in chemistry the applicant only did basic research and now he is motivated to do application based research.
Other reason might be that he has less publication during his first PhD which he wants to improve with the second one.
And yes one very obvious reason could also be lack of postdoc position due to recession and reduced government research funding as most seen in Europe now a day. Where many research are applying for a second PhD due to the lack of postdoc position......as fully funded PhD position are more available than postdoc position....
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: First why a Postdoc would consider a second PhD:
TO SURVIVE
===========
Needless to say, how the existing system treats the Postdocs-Use them, as a cheap labor and throw them. In almost all of the occasions, it is the Professor/Supervisor who is benefitted.
According to Nature article, vacancies in academia is available only for 15% of the Postdocs. In addition to this, comes the problem of Visa and Racism. In France, it is impossible for one to get a job (even in Industry) let alone be called for the interview, without perfect French and a "French" sounding First & Last Name. Yet, French institution lure students from developing countries with their fancy programs. In one of the article on the "invisible" racism in Canada, one even acknowledged that the system is skewed in favour of Canadians (they want the good jobs for Canadians), yet they beckon PhD's and postdocs, from all over the world. Then, say the education is not enough, forcing them to work as bartenders and taxi drivers. Nature (Journal) itself points to some postdocs to have taken up the job of a forklift. Personally, I know a postdoc ending up as a stay-at-home Dad...And in almost all cases, none even spares a moment to think about the future and families of their postdocs or help them acquire skillsets that could help them move to industries, in the worst case scenario. Neither, opportunities in entrepreneurship is supported (National Laboratories, for example). In fact, Canada actively discourages it.
So, the best reason I think a person would choose a second PhD is to survive and since, PhD is usually longer than a postdoc could hope to acquire skillsets that could be used in industry and subsequently find a job. ***Personally, I would urge you to consider the postdoc as you'd be helping him and also prevent another "idiotic" bright student from wasting his life in the name of academic/knowledge pursuits*** It is a beneficial proposition for you as well, as a postdoc would require less supervision and hence more publications could be achieved for lesser cost...!
Upvotes: -1 |
2012/12/26 | 654 | 2,991 | <issue_start>username_0: I completed one term of a master's program before finding it was not what I expected, so I promptly quit. Now, I am sending fall application letters to other master's programs, for which I will be a paying student, but am uncertain how to mention this previous program, or whether that is even necessary. I do intent to send a transcript, as I want to transfer a few credits, however, should I mention this elsewhere in my application? Place a line on my CV? Mention this previous program in my application letters? Offer an explanation upfront describing why I left the program?
I found generally useful advice in [Is transferring to another university an option for an unhappy PhD student?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2498/is-transferring-an-option-for-an-unhappy-grad-student), but the answers do not explain what etiquette one should follow in reporting such a situation.<issue_comment>username_1: The important thing here is that you realize that you *do* need to report this information to schools to which you will be applying, as it will matter in their deliberations over your application. That said, you do have some degree of latitude in finding the best way to inform the schools of this. If they have a "special notes" or "additional information" question in the application, that might be a good place to put such information. Otherwise, you would want to mention it somewhere in the cover letter (if you get to include one) or personal statement (if you don't).
However, this information should be provided *by you*; don't leave it for the people writing your recommendation letters to mention. That will just raise more red flags.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: For your CV, don't focus on the fact that you quit the other program, but that you attended it for one term. As such, it would fit best in the section where you list your past education. Definitely send your transcript, because it shows that you achieved some things during that term, and will also count into the evaluation of your current knowledge.
The more delicate aspect is of course how to explain your quitting without full completion of the other program. However, I don't think that it will be a very critical aspect of your application. Such switches happen a lot, for various good reasons, and reviewers of your application will not automatically view it as negative if you don't push them in that direction. If you have good explanations for switching the program, you can put it in a motivation letter. For example, how, during the other program, you discovered that the program you are applying to know fits much better to your interests and skills. The CV wouldn't be be a good place for such reasons. If you can't offer an explanation that gives your application a bonus point, don't try to discuss around it in your application documents. But be prepared for questions in this direction in a potential interview.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/27 | 505 | 1,898 | <issue_start>username_0: Can German Hochschule offer a Ph.D.? I know that some of them can't, but does this apply to any hochschule or does it differ from one to another?<issue_comment>username_1: I should warn that I am not an expert on this, but this is how I understand it. Basically, there are different types of "Hochshule". There is the Universität, which always has the right to offer Ph.D.'s. Then there are the Hochschule and Fachhochschule. The latter in general is more oriented to learning a trade (as an electrical engineer, for example) as opposed to more research focused. The Fachhocschule don't have the Promotionsrecht, that is, that cannot hand out Ph.D degrees. As for the Hochschule, there it depends. Some are on the same level as a Universität. In that case, they can hand out Ph.D. degrees, otherwise not. Presumably the deciding factor is whether there is any substantial research component at the Hochschule or not.
More information can be found here: <http://www.hochschulkompass.de/en/higher-education-institutions.html>. There you can also search if a specific Hochschule can grant PhD degrees or not.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One further note to clarify is that using "Ph.D." to denote doctoral degrees in Germany is somewhat nebulous, as many of the doctoral degree-granting institutions in Germany *do not* award Ph.D.'s. Instead, the range of doctoral degrees is somewhat broader. For instance, the institution where I work offers the *Dr. rer. nat.* and the *Dr.-Ing.*, but not a Ph.D. In fact, we are not even allowed to use the term "Ph.D." in our advertising of our doctoral degree programs.
So, if you are asking "can German universities award doctoral degrees," Pieter's answer above is correct. However, if you mean literally "can German universities award Ph.D.'s," I'd have to say the answer is essentially "no."
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/12/27 | 495 | 2,304 | <issue_start>username_0: I took some solitary graduate-level courses as a non-degree student at some US schools and plan to take further modules in England. These courses relate to my other degrees and certificates, but are from more elite institutions and provide more advanced, specialized training not easily found elsewhere. Is it acceptable practice to list solitary courses on an academic CV? What section and in what format might this appear in?<issue_comment>username_1: **Acceptable? Sure. Useful? Probably not.**
If you're applying to graduate programs, then listing these courses would be appropriate. On the other hand (at least for US schools), you need to submit official transcripts for those courses anyway. Also, if you expect those courses to play a significant role in your admission, you need to make that case in your application statement.
If you're applying to an academic position that is primarily teaching, then listing the courses might be appropriate to show that you have at least taken courses on the topics you intend to teach. But if you expect those courses to play a significant role in your hiring, you need to make that case in your application statements.
If you're applying to an academic position that is primarily research (including most postdocs and tenure-track faculty positions), there's no point in listing what courses you've taken. With rare exceptions, your research record (as listed in your CV, described in your research statement, and judged in your letters) is essentially the only thing that matters for such positions. Teaching experience might play a role, but classes that you've merely *taken* won't. If you think specific courses significantly strengthen your case—making you one of those rare exceptions—you need to to make that case in your application statements.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The long form of my CV used to include a few example courses to indicate what I'd learned on my various degrees (after the degree I said "courses included: ..."). I have no idea whether that helped, but I don't see how it can hurt, unless it makes the CV too long & people miss something more significant. But I think it does show something about your specific interests and level of commitment to academia.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/27 | 806 | 3,415 | <issue_start>username_0: I sometimes find an article published in several conferences.
>
> If similar material is published in different conference proceedings,
> how do I choose which one to cite?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: It's a little unusual to have the same or even similar material published in different venues. First of all, you didn't say whether your area uses conferences as primary publication venues or not - I'm assuming it does, otherwise why even cite a conference publication.
In that case, what exactly are you citing in the article ? If it's a specific result (empirical, theoretical etc), then probably the oldest venue where it appears is the first occurrence of that result, and should be cited. If you're citing background material or motivation, then either the first paper that discusses the relevant motivation, or maybe a survey article ?
At any rate, the key is to understand exactly what you're citing the article for, and find the oldest occurrence of that concept.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Normally you should cite the most recent version, which is probably also the most prestigious venue (normally republication is done while ideas are working their way up the prestige ladder). It's possible that only the earlier version contains the material you want to cite though, but unless that's substantially longer than a later version, then I would assume that means the author(s) have recanted that part, and you should probably mention that in your article e.g. "Bryson (1986) claims fish can fly (p. 253), though note later work does not reiterate this claim (Bryson 1991; Bryson 1993)."
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: On a number of occasions, I found myself knowing the author personally pretty closely, and would ask them which version they want me to cite. On other occasions, I would cite whichever source I read first, and just stick to that. People should not be cited five times for one idea; it is little of my business to untangle their political games of publishing the same stuff in different journals (a very common thing in the social sciences I mingle with), and I would do whatever works for me, not for them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You should have two goals in mind when choosing what to cite:
1. Give credit, by citing the first person to discover the result, in the form in which it was originally found
2. Helping the reader interested in looking the result up and learn it in more depth.
Either one of them can be more important than the other, depending on the type of your paper and of the context of the specific citation.
The two goals are often conflicting; for instance, #1 might tell you to use an obscure conference proceeding with a clumsy first version of the result, and #2 might suggest to use a clear exposition in a book by another author instead. You might want to go for a tradeoff instead and cite a newer paper by the first author with a better version of the result.
In any case, if your choice is backed up by either of these two rationales, or by a suitably weighted linear combination of them, then in my opinion no one can blame you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Cite all versions! I find this practice useful, because it gives me all the information that the author has. Ideally, you should explain the distinctions between different versions too.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/28 | 1,091 | 4,412 | <issue_start>username_0: A usual flow of a project (in my field) commonly looks like this:
>
> having a result -> (1) writing a paper (with all the proofs) -> (2) making a conference version -> (3) uploading a full version to eprint -> (4) journal version
>
>
>
Usually, (2) is a shorter version of (1); and (3)
is almost the same as (1) up to some changes that came up during the process of making (2); Yet, the work on (2) and (3) happens almost at the same time.
The question is how to deal with maintaining both versions (full + short) of the same paper.
So far I have been keeping two separate "papers", but this solutions has its problems: if you make a change to one (say, fixing a typo), you need to remember making the same change in the other one (which you usually forget).
What is the best strategy?<issue_comment>username_1: You can change your workflow slightly:
1. Write a paper with full proofs, polish it, and upload to arxiv.
2. Prepare the conference version (fairly late). You will use version 1 as your starting point, but you can edit it freely. You can remove proofs and refer to the arxiv version. You can polish the story, introduction, etc. You may spot typos in the arxiv version, but do not worry about those too much. There is no need to revise the arxiv version yet if the typos are minor.
3. Prepare the journal version. The key thing is that you will use version 2 as the starting point, not version 1. Of course you will now copy-and-paste the full proofs from version 1, but the rest of the text comes from the conference version. Therefore the main matter has already automatically gone through all the revisions that were related to the preparation of the conference submission(s), addressing conference reviews, preparing the camera-ready conference paper, etc.
Now you can simply revise your arxiv submission by replacing it with the journal version, whenever the journal version is ready.
If you follow this approach, there is never need to maintain parallel versions. You will never need to worry about updating version x when you fix typos in version y. People interested in your work can read the first arxiv version early, and your final arxiv version is as well polished as the journal version.
Note that you can start phase 3 as soon as you have prepared the final camera-ready version of the conference paper. When the conference version finally appears, you can already have a preliminary draft of the journal version written, and you can use it to revise your arxiv submission if it seems to be a good idea.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I would use `git` with branches and selective merging. You can selectively merge your typo fixes and stuff between one branch and the other, in whichever direction you choose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are using latex. I use following approach. I define three variables. ArticleTypeAll , ArticleTypeJournal and ArticleTypeConference . I use ArticleTypeAll for parts which is same for all parts (Conference and Journal). In my example authors information. I use ArticleTypeJournal for only journal part. For example introduction to journal may be different than conference one. Same goes for ArticleTypeConference.
I split every part to different latex file to easily version control and compare them. If command allow me to conditionally include files. Here I use input instead of include since this is an article. I set variables as.
* ArticleTypeAll = true
* ArticleTypeJournal = true
* ArticleTypeConference = false
```
\documentclass[10pt,a4paper]{article}
\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
\author{username_3}
\title{Conference Journal Together}
\newif\ifArticleTypeAll
\newif\ifArticleTypeJournal
\newif\ifArticleTypeConference
\ArticleTypeAlltrue
\ArticleTypeJournaltrue
\ArticleTypeConferencefalse
\begin{document}
\ifArticleTypeAll
this place is included in all
\fi
\ifArticleTypeJournal
this place is included in journal article only
\fi
\ifArticleTypeConference
this place is included in Conference article only
\fi
\ifArticleTypeAll
\input{Authors}
\fi
\ifArticleTypeJournal
\input{IntroductionJournal}
\fi
\ifArticleTypeConference
\input{IntroductionConference}
\fi
\end{document}
```
Output of this document like below.
```
this place is included in all
this place is included in journal article only
Authors
IntroductionJournal
```
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/12/31 | 881 | 3,872 | <issue_start>username_0: I am about to complete my PhD. My area is functional analytic/ operator theoretic aspects of quantum information. I am applying for post-doctoral positions in various places. Recently, one group called me for presentation/ interview over Skype. It should consist of a presentation (20 minutes) and 20 minutes interview. My questions are the following:
1. What are the common things one should focus while presenting online, and what I should avoid (say, in my slide, or oral comments etc).
2. The people who called me for interview are physicists (my work is connected to quantum information). As a mathematics student, what is the best way to make myself presentable in these cases.
Some background: I have two publications, some old preprints (arxiv, on discrete mathematics, but not published and not connected with my present research) and a few in draft form (not submitted in arxiv yet). Published papers are not mathematically very exiting, but came up in some reasonably good and well reputed physics journals. Also what I am afraid is, they are not reviewed in math review (many papers from the same journal are frequently reviewed though).
I am a bit afraid, as this is my first time of appearing in such interview (and the reasons mentioned above). Advanced thanks for your helps and suggestions.<issue_comment>username_1: They are not going to ask you why your papers are not in Math Reviews, or why you never published your old discrete math stuff. You can safely forget about both those things. They want to make sure that you are able to communicate your research ideas to them, and understand theirs -- both are very nontrivial questions in cross-disciplinary hiring. If your research that's in the draft stage can be related to what their group is doing, this is what you'll want to get across. Stating every definition precisely is not as important, but you may be asked to give some of them. If you can, make a nonlinear beamer where navigation arrows point to extra slides with definitions and technical assumptions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The question asks a number of things. I am going to focus on interviewing over Skype/video conferencing since it is extremely difficult to do correctly. The issues associated with interviewing is very different from presenting.
Some things to consider when doing a Skype interview
1. Location: You need a private setting, a good internet connection, a backup landline, good lighting, and good acoustics. I suggest investing in a off white sheet to use as a backdrop. It is also useful for the camera to be directly in front of you so that it appears you are looking at them when you look at the screen. Make sure you have your notes and a drink within reach.
2. Timing: You need to know when the interview is happening including the timezone and who is initiating the call. You also need to know what happens if there is a problem. You do not want to lose your valuable interview time to technical problems.
3. Attendees: Once the interview starts, you need to know who is in the room and where they are sitting. If there are people you cannot see, ask them to move. Ask each person to introduce themselves and make sure you can hear them. During this stage you need to get a baseline read on their facial expressions. You also need to know where they are sitting so that you can "look at them". The slight eye shift required to look at them on the screen is likely not exaggerated enough. Practice this.
4. Control: Make sure you know who asks each question. Ideally use peoples names so they know you are talking to them. If you don't hear the question, ask them to repeat it. Check that they can hear and see you frequently.
5. Gestures: You need to minimize your gestures, pointing, and figitng. They are really noticeable on Skype.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/31 | 637 | 2,777 | <issue_start>username_0: As [suggested](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/5983/4462) by @PiotrMigdal I am putting a separate question regarding the title mentioned above.
I am a Mathematics PhD student doing work in functional analysis / operator theory aspects of quantum information. My basic training (up to masters) is in so called 'Pure Mathematics' ($C^\*$ algebra, representation theory, elliptic curve etc.). I am about to complete my PhD and applying for post doctoral positions. It seems most of the jobs in this area are for experimentalists and a few for theorists. I do not have much knowledge about experiment. Moreover, my understanding about quantum measurements as very basic. These can be considered as negative points. Positive sides: I have a few published papers in some reputed physics journal, a few (in discrete mathematics) preprints, and a few works in the draft stage. However the published papers are not reviewed by math. review.
My question is, what a mathematics student, like me, should focus/emphasise if he/she go for a job (for me post doctoral) interview in front of physics faculties.
Also more general question can be regarding the job perspective of mathematics students in quantum information. Advanced thanks for any suggestion, answer etc. Feel free to edit and/or retag it, if you think it is necessary.<issue_comment>username_1: A lot of quantum information is a part of mathematics (that is, mathematically well-defined concepts, proper proofs, etc...), with some physical motivation. Many problems can be stated easily as mathematical ones, without providing and physical grounding.
So if you are a pure maths PhD, then it may be actually beneficial for you, as you: can prove (not only hand-wave) and perhaps have better training (and motivation) in Hilbert spaces, group theory, discrete mathematics, abstract algebra, convex geometry, algorithmic complexity, information theory etc...
Surely, different groups have different tastes for different problems, different emphasis on physical, mathematical, numerical and experimental content. Just ask them; if it is pure quantum information then maybe even you can go without knowing quantum mechanics (which is worth learning anyway, BTW).
Source: I am PhD student in geometry of quantum states; a considerable fraction of people working on that topic are mathematicians.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It may be too late for this, but I'd suggest giving a talk for physicists in a lower stakes setting (eg a seminar at a school that isn't interviewing you). Physicists often have different names for things and ways of talking about them, and it can be really nice to have some exposure to the kinds of questions you might get asked.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/31 | 1,311 | 5,682 | <issue_start>username_0: My PhD advisor wants me to work on two different problems during my PhD. One is the a problem of their suggestion and another is collaborative work with some company. Both the problems are disjoint. I have been given the option, that if I want to work on one problem then it should be the problem on for my advisor's collaborative research and I should leave the problem initially suggested. However, I don't want to give up my present problem as that sounds interesting to me and I have already worked for one year on it. When I told my advisor that I don't find the collaborative work interesting, it was suggested that I work on both the problems. However, I am finding it hard to work on two problems. Its like a dual PhD for me. I cannot say anything to my advisor as I'm told I have to work on the collaborative work as my stipend comes from it and else I should leave the PhD. My advisor also does not advise me when I propose ideas about my previous research. Please suggest what should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on how committed you are to the research project. Your Ph.D. thesis can strongly influence your future course in academia and research. That being said, plenty of Ph.D. recipients have gone on to do research in fields quite distinct from their thesis work.
If your funding is tied to one of the projects, it would certainly be easier to find the time to complete your thesis by working on that project alone. However, you should only make this shift if the funded project is also interesting to you. There few things as difficult as finishing a thesis on a topic in which you are not interested.
Ultimately, what matters most about your Ph.D. thesis is that you finish it. If you think that finding time to work on your thesis will be most limiting, then you should choose the funded topic. If you think that staying interested in your research is the biggest hurdle, then you should choose the topic you are interested in, even if it takes you longer to graduate on account of your other obligations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The most important line in your post seems to be one that you didn't give much weight to: "my stipend comes from [the collaborative project]". From my experience, this is a common situation, where the money for your stipend comes from a project you're not interested in pursuing.
Unfortunately, the only real alternative for you is to write your own grant proposal, which is a significant investment of time for both you and your advisor, and carries the not-so-minor risk that the grant won't be funded, which leaves you exactly where you started, with the added problem that there hasn't been much progress on the existing grant.
The second alternative is to leave the advisor and try to find someone else, but I would recommend against that for two reasons. Firstly, it's hard to find someone else with funding on a project you like. Secondly, the problem you're having now—the funded project is less interesting than the unfunded project—is one you'll likely face again in the future. Your advisor's approach of pursuing both projects is (again, from my experience) a typical way of dealing with this, and it will likely benefit you to have experience with this approach during your PhD years.
I recognize that it means extra work for you, and I don't really have much advice on that front. Try not to think of it as extra work, but rather as extra publications in different research areas. That helps minimize the sting.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There is nothing inherently wrong in an advisor asking you to work on two projects — depending on the subfield you're in, this could even be common practice. The two common approaches are:
1. Choose a single topic, drill down till you have enough material for a thesis.
* If you're successful, you have a pretty nifty thesis and you can call yourself the absolute master of the subsubtopic X that you focused on.
* On the other hand, if you reach a dead end (which sometimes happen after 4 years of hard work), you have nowhere to go! You'll have to find a new research topic, which can take another 3-4 years, which is pretty depressing.
2. Start on one project as a fresh graduate student, but gradually start working on multiple projects. Advantages are
* you'll have a good pile of publications when you finish
* If you hit a dead end on one project (or funding dries up), you can focus your attention on a different project
* If you find one project moving faster than the other, you can switch focus to that to graduate on time (or sooner).
* If the topics are diverse (but connectable by a common theme), you can spin that to your advantage by demonstrating you have broad research interests. (pretty hard to get a position if you only want to do X).
I honestly can find no disadvantage with the second route except for the fact that it can be a bit overwhelming for a graduate student, especially if their advisor doesn't realize that the work load is heavy. I tend to look at it as training for the future — as a postdoc/scientist/faculty, you'll most likely be juggling several different projects of your own, in addition to collaborating, teaching, advising, etc. So this is a good way to start learning efficient time management.
In short, I don't think your situation is alarming and you should take this as an opportunity to learn some soft skills (time management, recognizing a hot potato, identifying paths that lead somewhere, etc.). Now, if you're really uninterested in the project, then that's a different issue — you probably have to look for a different advisor.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/01 | 1,457 | 6,101 | <issue_start>username_0: I live in a third-world country. Although I have a second-class degree in IT, I work in the general banking section in a private banking organization. This is possible because, in our country, private banks recruit engineering students (among others) as Management Trainees. They are rotated among various sections in the bank and are trained up for two years. After two years, they are promoted as Executives.
After joining the organization I found that there is huge amount of study involved to get confirmation and to get promotion. Moreover, I don't know Accounting.
Now I am thinking, since I have to study anyway, why not take the GRE and TOEFL, then study apply for a MSc in IT or computer science and then a PhD degree from USA.
I have already been away from academia for almost four years. And, since I am doing a full-time job, I think it will take 2 years more to prepare myself applying for higher education in the USA. At that point I will be 32 years old.
Is a PhD degree from USA enough to find a job at that age?<issue_comment>username_1: I am having a feeling that you want to go for academia or at least r & d of some company, after PhD. If you really really have 'the calling', then and only then take such a risk. I know only few student who actually took such a risk. Do not come in academia with a very romantic thought and be prepared for hardship, toil and trouble. These things increases, if you can not manage to get in one of the the top places. Also consider the financial matters as well.
If you can sponsor yourself, then perhaps you can go to some reasonably good university in USA, without any recommendation (your job experience can help you in certain ways). Since I have never been there, someone else can answer it better. Otherwise, go to the best institute available in your country for getting a MSc(Engg), MSc (by research), MTech or similar degree. Make sure, the the faculties of that place are active in research and (better) have some contact in USA. In this way, even if you do not want to go for PhD after 2 years, you still have some placement options from the institute, you are studying.
I myself never appeared for GRE etc. So some others can tell the procedure better. All the best for your future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: *since I have to study anyway, why not go for GRE+TOEFL, MS in IT or Computer Science and then a PhD degree from USA*
Maybe you're aware of this, but "studying" has little to do with getting a Ph.D. It might suffice for an MS, but a good MS involves more than just "studying" as well.
In other words, if (as stated) your idea is that instead of "study" to get a promotion, you want to study to get an advanced degree, you're in for some disappointment. A graduate degree (especially a Ph.D) involves a lot more "doing" and independent creative thinking.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This is not how it works. A degree doesn't mean you will get a job. Actually, a degree only proves you passed a certain education course and wrote your dissertation.
In order to get a job, you must be proficient / or at least well-familiar with specific requirements of your chosen job posting. Whatever the job requires, you need to know it before applying and have some experience with it.
The degree contents is not enough to please your potential employer. You must study also around the curriculum from day 1 to match the real job requirements [as you have found them in job postings]
Further, a PhD is a highly specialized research degree focused on a very tiny, narrowed-down area, in which you will most likely never find a job in your lifetime [unless you are very clever or lucky and research something that companies or universities dream of].
Master's degree is already an advanced degree. Chances are, you won't even find a position in your Master's specialization because it is too specialized. For example, what you say about your company that makes you a trainee manager, that already means you didn't find a job matching your Bachelor's.
Regarding positions in Academia, there are very few, if any, and the number of PhDs competing for one such position might be around 500. This is one thing to consider. There are many extremely bright PhDs who really want to teach and cannot find any university to go. There is also something called "tenure". When you get it, you can stay at your post for the rest of your life. Professors rarely leave their posts, and when they do, the role may be filled by the associate professor, in some cases. So that you would eventually wait 10 years as a postdoc before becoming the professor that you want to be. During that time, there is often a very low pay as these postdocs are cheap labor working ~55h / week.
The supply of PhDs is so much exceeding the demand, that I would recommend to re-evaluate the situation and make more realistic goals, such as look at available positions and their requirements before studying. If you study, pay for access to extra contents relevant to your desired profession and learn from these resources as a part of your advanced degree to bridge the gap between real job requirements and the academic curriculum.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I did a PhD and then went into the software industry followed by banking. I did the PhD because I love science rather than for career enhancement so I never regretted doing it. In the software industry the PhD is not well valued. Three years of work experience would be much better. In banking the right PhD is useful for certain roles such as quants, hedge managers, analysts etc. In general a suitable PhD helps in some roles, has no benefit in others and may make you overqualified elsewhere.
My advice would be to do a PhD only if you are inspired by research, not as a career move. Only continue into a postdoc academic career if you are really sure it is your lifetime calling.
However, it is possible that coming from a third world country the PhD may open more doors for you. My own experience does not address that.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/01 | 2,987 | 12,484 | <issue_start>username_0: While writing the literature review for my doctoral dissertation, I picked up a few recent dissertations on similar topics from the library to get some pointers on references and style. As I was reading some of the articles cited in one of these theses, I discovered that this person had lifted large blocks of text from the cited works verbatim. Although the original works were cited, the borrowed text was not presented as a quote, but used directly in the thesis.
I checked a few more, just out of curiosity, and realized that basically the whole literature review by this author (who graduated with a PhD two years ago) was cut-and-paste verbatim quotes strung together (and who knows how much more of the thesis is plagiarized - I only checked this one chapter).
This really ticks me off, as I (and many students like me) spend a great deal of time reworking cited information into proper coherent explanations for our projects. I happen to know the offending author's advisor pretty well, as we currently work together outside of my graduate program.
Should I say something or should I just let this person get away with plagiarizing large parts of their dissertation?
---
Edit:
-----
I still don't know what I will do about this -- no-one wants to be a tattle-tale, and it really isn't any of my business how other people go about getting their doctorates. However, as I am currently writing my dissertation, it really irks me when I see someone else getting away with this, as I know from experience how much hard work goes into writing a PhD thesis.
I just have one more comment -- I ran the chapter in question through the [TurnItIn](http://turnitin.com/en_us) software, which I have access to as an instructor at my institution. The thesis came back as 52% unoriginal. Turnitin only counts exact matches, so the 52% figure doesn't even include some of the paragraphs that I caught, where the author has changed one or two words but kept the sentence structure.
I doubt that there would be any legal consequences, even if I report the thesis for plagiarism -- it is more a question of academic dishonesty and what steps the institution that awarded the degree would take. I will show it to my advisor and see what he says before I do anything.<issue_comment>username_1: This is of course a sensitive issue. However, the ethically correct behavior is to notify *someone* responsible about the problem. Etiquette says to go to the advisor first, as the advisor is the person who, after the author who committed the plagiarism, stands to lose the most from the accusation.
However, if you feel squeamish about doing it by yourself, you can talk to your advisor about the best way to proceed.
The main issue on your part is if you will need to rely on the plagiarizer's advisor for recommendation letters. Then you should definitely proceed with caution, and with the support of your advisor, department administrators, or both.
Of course, make sure that you've done your due diligence before going public with your charges, and to have the evidence *with you* when you meet with *anyone* about this matter.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The person did provide the citations, so for me it is not clear if **legally** this person did something wrong. I would first try and find this out before taking any steps. Of course, I would not accept this kind of verbatim copying if I were a supervisor. The angle on takes in an article is always a bit different than in the cited work. In addition, paraphrasing the text shows that you have understood what was written.
And be carefull how you deal with this, some people would not appreciate you being a snitch (in their view). However, I agree with @username_1 that it is the scientifically ethical thing to do to at least report this. And do get some backup from your own supervisor/professor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My institution has a commitee in charge of this, does yours not have anything similar? There you can report such findings (even anonymously since the evidence is not depending on the person providing it). They will then decide upon the procedure to be followed.
Revoking a title is not an easy procedure in any case, also as there are large numbers of personal relationships entangled in it. I just know that almost any case where something like this happened, it ended in court.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: One possible course of action is to talk to the student's advisor about a "hypothetical," that is, ask him how he would feel if he were told that someone had plagiarized a PhD thesis in such-and-such a way.
One possible result is that he is entirely surprised, or better yet, indignant. Then you can follow up with your secret and tell him the truth about his student.
Another possibility is that he winks and then says something like "yeah, these things happen from time to time." If that's the case, he "knows," and then it's up to you to decide (from a political point of view), whether or not to bring it to his **official** knowledge.
This idea came from a novel, "Strong Medicine" by <NAME>, where a young doctor went to his hospital CEO to inquire about how he should advise a "friend" to report that a senior doctor (his boss) was operating under the influence of drugs. The CEO said, "I don't want to deal with problems from another hospital, but tell your "friend" to keep his mouth shut," then winked at the young doctor and told him how valuable the boss was to his hospital.
The young doctor had his answer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: If I understand you correctly, the only place in which text is known to have been lifted was the literature review. While it is inappropriate to do so, it's possible that only the *phrasing* can be considered as plagiarized (and even that, like @PaulHiemstra states, is not exactly the case since the author did cite the sources).
In other words, you do not have evidence that the actual research presented in the thesis is original and not lifted from anyone. That means one cannot claim that "large parts of the... dissertation" are plagiarized. Now, in theory, some other content could be plagiarized as well, but I would avoid suggesting this is the case.
Anyway, based on what you know there is nothing which merits a reconsideration of the awarding of the title. At most, the Ph.D. candidate should have been chided for failing to cite clearly enough, and require to resubmit his dissertation so that the literature review is less copy-pasty.
However, the dissertation's readers / examination committee should have picked up on this. They weren't doing their job and that's actually a *different* problem, which is even more important to address (among other reasons, because of the possibility they may have missed a more material plagiarism)
With that said, I think it is your *duty* as an academic to act here. My suggestion for the order of actions is as follows:
1. Inform your own advisor of this matter, letting him know you're going to talk to the dissertation author's advisor. Don't ask for his permission or anything - but he might have some relevant cautionary information.
2. Talk to the dissertation author's advisor. Tell him that the dissertation needs to be corrected, or at least an erratum added on all relevant pages in the physical and on-line copies. Ask him to contact his previous advisee (is that a word?) about it, as though he (the advisor) noticed it himself, to make the advisee feel less uncomfortable and more obliged to act.
3. If the advisor agrees, you're done with this part (well, you'll need to check up on him). Stop reading this list
4. Tell him you intend to continue to pursue this despite his refusal.
5. Contact the dissertation author and ask that he address the problem.
6. If the author doesn't agree, write the both of them and threaten to report them (now they're both at fault; maybe the advisor already knew and didn't care).
7. If that doesn't work, try your grad student union / junior researcher union, and specifically your department's union rep. Don't have one? Too bad... anyway, the union might have some ability to apply pressure and the interest to uphold academic professionalism; and ratting someone out to his union is not as bad as ratting him out to the university authorities.
8. Talk to someone like the vice-dean in charge of graduate researchers, or a corresponding relatively-low-level official in charge of oversight of Ph.D. candidates' academic progress. (I mean someone in an academic capacity, not an administrative one).
9. Talk to your dean / department head.
10. If all else fails, publish an open letter. Make sure it's very polite, vitriol-free, makes no unfounded assumptions and does not demand anyone's head on a platter, merely that the issue be addressed and that the principles of professional academic behavior be better adhered to.
With this resolved, consider trying to talk to whoever in your university is in charge of appointing dissertation reader / examiner committees for Ph.D. candidates. There should be some kind of effort on his/her part to ensure committee members understand they need to notice such things.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: A lot of posts have already touched on the delicacy of this issue, and the vulnerable position the OP is in. I agree whole heartedly, especially if your field intersects with this other person's field, as it presumably does.
Ethically, I think you're bound to report this; at the same time I don't think you're bound to make your own career path more difficult over it. The obvious solution to me then, is to **do it anonymously.**
Create a random free email address somewhere without any identifying info involved, address your letter to a few appropriate people, and explain nothing about how you came upon the info. Simply report exactly what you found, then be done with it. **I don't think it's your duty to make sure action is taken once you've appropriately reported it.** I do think one of the places you send it to needs to be an impartial university body though, like the registrar.
**You don't go straight to the advisor who oversaw it, or only to your department**, because worrying *only* about damage control isn't ethical either, and you would be potentially placing them in ethical conundrums as well. **I also don't think you go to *your* advisor**, because then you're just punting a difficult thing that has a clear right answer on to someone else. You're also potentially attaching your name to it; most departments are talkative places.
As you described it, it seems like several people did something wrong and there probably *should* be consequences. **If you help them avoid any consequences, are you complicit when it happens again?** I would think so.
*Edit: I just noticed this is a necro'd old post, so hopefully this is useful for others besides the OP*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I strongly advise not to contact the supervisor of the other student directly. I have seen my share of scientific misconduct while i was in research and most of the time when a student crossed the line so hard the supervisor was either ignorant to it, tolerating it or outright encouraging it.
While i would have trusted my supervisor to do the right thing (i informed him about shady things and he reacted appropriately) this is where it gets tricky: If your supervisor and the other supervisor are friends it could end up not so well, but you should know your supervisor good enough to know.
So you could try go via you supervisor, inform he ombudsman or corresponding committee anonymously, or you could wait after you have your PHD until you notify the institution.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: I'd recommend you to stay anonymous since your professors will be hostile to anything that reflects poorly on them and their institution. For example, they've been unable to just use Turnitin as a basic checker.
There are plagiarism hunters online who dissect theses for fun and entertainment. This might be a place to start.
In addition, you should contact the plagiarized sources.
Lastly, let chatgpt write all of your anonymous emails, so you don't give away your personal writing style.
It's important to point out academic misbehavior and you should have no second thoughts about doing so. Just take care of yourself in the process.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/02 | 1,025 | 4,604 | <issue_start>username_0: I have just completed my PhD. Although my examiners did not raise any concerns, I have been grappling with an ethical issue for the entire duration of my candidature.
The issue concerns professional knowledge of the field on which my research is based. This is an issue of concern because I am employed in the field and have access to information that is generally not publicly available (but is available to me as an employee) or only found in hard-to-get industry publications (e.g. newsletters). These publications are hard-to-get because of their specialised nature and limited circulation.
Disclosing this information creates a potential conflict of interest for me (because of reasons associated with commercial-in-confidence, breach of trust etc.). It gets even worse because I am often actively involved in generating this information as part of various negotiations I am required to have with third parties (in my capacity as an employee). As an example, I draft policy speeches for my CEO so this has the effect of quoting my own work in my dissertation (but attributed to my CEO in the citation and bibliography!)
To resolve this matter, I have declared (categorically) this conflict of interest (several times in my dissertation) (although I don't identify myself as the ghost writer). I have also put whatever information I thought could be ethically disclosed in the relevant context (e.g. cited the publicly available newsletter, where possible). This was to ensure future researchers could benefit from this 'inside' knowledge. I have stated this as one of the contributions to knowledge that my dissertation is making.
I must add that the professional knowledge does not contradict or undermine my research, so I am certainly not withholding the information for this reason. On the contrary, this information enhances the main arguments of my study (so omitting it presents a significant dilemma for me).
i would love to hear how else could this matter be resolved.<issue_comment>username_1: I've known cases where the thesis itself has **very** restricted circulation for a fixed period (e.g. six years) after completion, to protect the commercial information that went into it. The restriction also meant that papers couldn't be published on the back of the PhD research for six years, too.
That was an arrangement made early on during the writing of the thesis, and it enabled the use of a lot of information that would otherwise have been out of bounds.
That's potentially quite an impediment to one's career, so one would have to get good advice on whether it was a price worth paying. But it doesn't make an academic career impossible: I know of at least one successful academic who's take this path - she's an exceptional talent, and so it's no surprise that her path has been exceptional. It does put an emphasis on diversifying straight after the PhD, to gather material for new publications. Diversification can be a good thing: lots of new post-docs get typecast and trapped by and in their PhD subject.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: And, as a small point, if one's work is confidential for the reason that it is so extremely useful/important/wonderful (!?!), while one cannot claim this directly, it is usually possible to communicate facts about the situation in a way that will be understood by potential employers. One's letter writers would hopefully/presumably comment on the situation, and possibly gossip will lead the way, besides, if it's really something good.
At least as a starting point, honesty + keeping promises is a good baseline. :)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: A good starting point would be to talk to your research advisor about how to handle this, and follow his/her advice. This is the sort of situation for which advisors exist to help.
That said, the way you are handling it seems reasonable and sensible. You cannot breach your confidentiality obligations. However, public but hard-to-find newsletters don't seem quite as problematic; you can cite them and quote from them.
For future reference: I personally try to separate out my research from any confidential commercial work I do, precisely to avoid these kinds of conflicts. In other words, I try to avoid doing research on the same topic where I also know confidential commercial information, and I try to avoid taking on confidential commercial engagements on the same topic where I am actively doing research. I personally think that is good practice, but this is a matter for personal preference and style.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/02 | 712 | 3,083 | <issue_start>username_0: How important is it for an undergraduate student majoring in Physics and Mathematics (or any other science) to have experience in research (*e.g.*, have a peer reviewed paper to his name most probably in collaboration with a professor) at the undergraduate level, keeping in mind that he will be applying for a master's or other postgraduate degree?<issue_comment>username_1: During my studies it was relatively rare to publish as an undergraduate. The level of research needed for a peer reviewed publication is imo higher than what an undergraduate can produce. Maybe if the supervisor writes a paper based on your results, and with a lot of help with producing the results, this might lead to a co-authorship for the undergraduate. Therefor, I think that in the Dutch system (my experience) a peer reviewed publication would be a plus, but definitely not a requirement for admission into a masters program. Ofcourse, you need have written a thesis, but it does not have to published in a peer-reviewed journal. I do not know how this experience translate to, say, the US, but I know for countries like Germany it is not even always usual for a PhD to write peer-reviewed articles.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want admission to the very best PhD programs in the US, prior formal research experience is *very* important, if not necessary. Admissions committees are primarily looking for **evidence of research potential**. The best possible evidence for "I'll be a good researcher someday" is "Look, I'm *already* a good researcher." So having formal peer-reviewed publications is better than having publishable but unpublished results, which is better than having research experience but no publishable results, which is better than having no research experience. If you're applying to the top PhD programs, you *will* be competing with applicants (yes, plural) who have peer-reviewed publications (yes, plural).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In the U.S., in mathematics, it is a bit unusual to have a peer-reviewed publication from an undergrad, despite the recent years' push for "Research Experiences for Undergrads". In some cases there are group-written papers in second or third-tier journals, but nothing too serious. Or the undergrad gets to be the tag-along on an applied-math research "team". Indeed, it is exceptional, and only rarely happens, that an undergrad in mathematics has adequate background (disregarding future potential) to make a serious contribution. It does happen, but rarely, and is not at all "expected". Evidently the situation is much different in other fields.
In terms of literal admission to good-but-not-elite programs, the usual "publications" we on admissions committees see are "nice", but not really evidence of future potential so much as *enthusiasm*, ... which is a good thing, for sure! ... but the level of focus and effort required for these little papers is far, far different than the level of commitment required to do a Ph.D., with or without "talent".
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/02 | 760 | 3,154 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm applying to PhD programs and want to ask for a reference letter from my former supervisor, who has since moved to a new university, so that his old work email is not working anymore. I've been asking him through his personal email; however, as he rarely checks it, sometime it takes more than a month for him to reply to me. One of the universities to which I'm applying has a deadline coming up in less than a month and I haven't heard from my former supervisor for a while. While panicking, I searched on Google and found his new email address. I wonder if it's reasonable to send email to that address and remind him as he never gave me the address.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is a good idea for you to contact your old advisor about the upcoming deadline, particularly if he normally takes a long time to get back to you.
Advisors are busy people, and have a lot of different tasks to complete. Sometimes we need a reminder that things are due, and a well-written note that *politely* asks us to take care of something is usually very welcome. A "bossy" or impolite note, however, will not help you and should definitely be avoided.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: From the formulation of your question, to me it seems your main concern is **if it is polite to send an e-mail to the address you were never explicitly given**, but instead found it on your own Googling.
It looks like you found **his/her new work address**. If that's the case, I'd say it's *completely fine to send an e-mail*. All the right reasons for contacting your former adviser before the deadline are already mentioned in @username_1's answer.
I'd just like to add that I've been told over and over again that a *good letter of recommendation from your former adviser is expected*, and that it's extra great if you can have letters of recommendation from more than one of your former advisers: *those are the people who were supposed to be working closest with you* and who *continually assessed your progress over a period of time*. If you can't get them to say something good for you, you must be very very special in some other way to get accepted to a PhD.
Back to the *is it polite* point: it is a work e-mail you found. That's the way he's expecting to be contacted concerning scientific things. It's public and accessible to everybody. That does not mean he'll reply to everything, but if you're one of his former students, he should be glad to reply if you split on good terms.
Also, I've contacted everybody who gave me a letter of recommendation after I got my PhD grant, and *I sad "thank you"*. I went to visit my supervisor in his office for a few minutes before I moved away for my PhD: those people, and he especially, are who made me love science, and made me look for a PhD in the first place. He often said that **advising students on how to go further with science/research was one of the best parts of his job**. So, maybe I was just lucky, but in my experience, your former advisers will be glad to help you, glad to know their help mattered and *won't mind you contacting them*.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/01/03 | 639 | 2,748 | <issue_start>username_0: After starting the application process this year, I found a [wiki page at UC Davis](http://notable.math.ucdavis.edu/wiki/Mathematics_Jobs_Wiki) that lists people who have supposedly been shortlisted, invited for interviews, or given offers for faculty positions in mathematics. I am listed in couple of places, and I wonder if this can harm my application. What are the pros and cons of this open source?<issue_comment>username_1: I am a professor at a top 20 school in mathematics and I have been on our department's hiring committee for the past several years. I can assure you that we take absolutely no notice of the contents of that particular website when making decisions. We consider ourselves competent enough to form our own judgements on any particular candidate. In the past, we have interviewed plenty of people whose name occurs frequently on that list, and plenty of those whose name does not appear at all. Moreover, the accuracy of that website is dubious at best; at my own institution it sometimes lists people who are not at all under consideration, and usually doesn't list people who are - including those who have been given offers. The only time I made any attempt to edit the website was when it claimed that we didn't have any positions available at all (which was false). I suspect that at least on one occasion someone invited themselves to our institution to give a talk and then put their own name on the website as a candidate (they were not). Thus, I suspect that *the effect this particular website has on job offers is minimal at most*.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> What are the pros and cons of this open source?
>
>
>
I see three pros of these types of lists. The first is that it can alert you to jobs that you did not know about. The second is that it can tell you something about where the status of the hiring process is. For example, if the list says an offer has been made and you haven't had an interview, then the odds are not good. The third use is that it gives you an idea of who is getting interviews and offers and with the help of the internet, how your CV stacks up.
The cons are pretty simple in my mind. In fact, each of the pros has a pretty substantial con. First, there are much better ways of finding out about jobs. Second, the list is not accurate; just because the list says an offer was made, doesn't mean it was. Further, I am not sure of the value of knowing that your application was unsuccessful. It seems reasonable to want to know, but I am not sure how it changes ones outlook. Third, there are better ways to figure out what the weak points of your application are.
As for being listed, I don't see any potential for harm.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/04 | 1,301 | 6,092 | <issue_start>username_0: Where and how can an independent researcher search for research problems in a paticular field, assuming that a person doesn't have direct contacts with anyone knowleageable about that field?
And once you get a research problem , how can you get an idea about the approximate time that will be required to solve that problem? My area of interest is mathematics.<issue_comment>username_1: Reading recent papers is a good way to come up with ideas for things to work on. For example, the last section of a paper often lists open problems and possible topics for future research, and they may also be scattered throughout the paper. Of course the author or other readers may be working on them, but that difficulty is unavoidable for any problem that isn't communicated privately to you. Some of the advantages of this approach are:
1. You have some evidence that the answer isn't already known. Of course maybe the author just didn't know it, but at least you are getting an expert opinion (which is particularly helpful if you aren't an expert yourself).
2. Your work may be of interest to other readers of this paper. This avoids the difficulty of making up a topic and then discovering that you are unable to interest anyone in it.
3. The published papers on the topic let you calibrate your level of knowledge. If you can read them, then you probably know enough to work on extensions. If you can't, then you need to learn more.
4. There's some reason to think progress may be possible.
By contrast, I would absolutely avoid working on famous problems. They satisfy 1 to 3 nicely, but the "famous" requirement specifically filters out any reasonable likelihood of a full solution, and progress towards a solution may be very difficult. Unless you are extraordinarily talented or lucky, choosing problems because of their fame is a big step in the direction of becoming a failure as a researcher or even a crackpot. Even if you are extraordinarily talented, there's no harm in starting with a warm-up goal, and this avoids the difficulty that many people have trouble estimating their own abilities.
As for how long it will take to solve a research problem, this is unanswerable. If you are really lucky, you might make important progress within a few weeks. If you get stuck in a rut or are missing some background, you might work fruitlessly for years on a problem that's not actually all that difficult. And of course problems vary enormously in their difficulty. With enough experience, you might be able to estimate how difficult or time-consuming certain problems might be, so you could guess what might make an appropriate Ph.D. thesis problem, for example. However, even experts are sometimes wrong, and developing this sort of feeling takes substantial research experience. When you are starting out, I don't think there's any reliable way to guess these sorts of things. This is one reason why Ph.D. advisors are important: they can offer feedback and advice based on intuitions the student is still developing.
If you are working on research without experience or expert guidance, you could use the following guidelines. Don't give up too quickly: anything worth publishing is worth spending weeks beating your head against with no apparent progress. (Of course I don't mean staring at a blank piece of paper, but trying ideas and discovering they don't work, looking at special cases and examples, studying background that may be relevant, etc.) Once you have a solid background in the relevant mathematics, which could take a long time depending on the field, you should probably be getting somewhere over a period of months. By "somewhere", I don't necessarily mean clear progress towards a solution, but you should be able to articulate an understanding of the problem you didn't have when you started, you should be coming up with tangential or spin-off ideas that may not solve the problem but could be interesting in their own right, etc. The ultimate test of successful research isn't whether you accomplish your original goals, but rather whether you find something interesting along the way. On the other hand, if months go by and you don't seem to be coming up with any interesting ideas or understanding, then this is probably not a fruitful research topic with your current level of background and experience.
Of course you shouldn't take any advice like the last paragraph too seriously. Research is a highly personal topic, and many people have different research styles. However, it may give you an idea of one reasonable approach.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to the excellent answer from username_1, I would add another point: finding an interesting problem that is worth spending time on is sometimes one of the hardest part of academic work. It's perhaps a bias from my field (Computer Security), but most researchers I have met are not working on a specific problem they chose years ago, but are constantly shifting between asking new problems/questions and addressing problems/questions (raised by them or others).
There are of course some known problems, but if they are known, it's likely because there is no obvious solution, and perhaps no solution at all. One can choose to work on one of them (I heard there are people working all the time on the P/NP problem), but it's probably better to create your own problems by challenging existing assumptions (X solve this problem by assuming P is true, but I know a case where P is not true, and therefore I want to solve it also in this case), by opening new approaches (would a quantum computer help solve this problem?), by looking at the future work proposed by other researchers, etc.
It might again be a bias from my field, but I have always felt that solving problems was never a big problem (and it's actually the funniest part of the job), while finding problems worth solving is actually hard, because it requires to have a global understanding of the field, of what exists, what doesn't, why it doesn't, and what could be possible.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/01/04 | 473 | 1,982 | <issue_start>username_0: Disclaimer: The GRE Program [discontinued the Computer Science Test](https://www.ets.org/gre/subject/faq)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I have already passed a GRE Subject Test for Computer Science, do I still need to pass the general GRE test?
Which test should I take first (general GRE or GRE Subject Test) and why?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> If I have already appeared for GRE Subject Test for Computer Science, do I still need to take the general GRE test?
>
>
>
**Short answer:** Likely, yes. If your school asks for the general GRE, then you need to take it. Without the general GRE scores, your application would not be considered complete, and, thus, may never get forwarded to the department's admissions committee. If in doubt, call or email the department(s) you are applying to and ask.
>
> Which test should I take first(general GRE/GRE Subject Test) and why?
>
>
>
It does not matter. Usually the general GRE is offered more frequently than the subject GREs, so many people take it first. There is no reason you have to do it this way. Take them in an order that is convenient for you, but do not wait until just before your application deadlines. Your scores will not get to your schools in time.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The tests are essentially independent, so **you can take either one first.**
Some schools want the subject test, but others don't care. This varies from one school to another. I got a PhD in computer science from a good school, but I never took the computer science GRE subject test. On the other hand, I did study a bit to improve my scores on the GRE general. If you want to know which tests to take (and how heavily they'll be weighted in your application), I think your **best option is to contact the school directly (or just read the application checklist on its website)**.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/04 | 484 | 2,175 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it possible to switch from one area of graduate study to another in US universities? For example, suppose someone has enrolled in a computer science phd program. Can he switch over to math(or physics) phd program in the same school later?(or say from applied mathematics to pure mathematics?)
What are the steps for doing for doing that?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, transferring to a different department requires a fresh application. While many departments will be sympathetic to applications from students alresdy at the university, they will still require all the formalities associated with a new admission.
However, the procedures vary wildly from place to place, and you must check with your local institution (if you have one already).
Other factors that can mitigate or complicate this process: if there's a standard procedure for doing this, if the two departments historically are comfortable with movement back and forth, if the departments are in the same college/school within the university, and so on.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In most cases you have to apply for admission to the new program, as most American universities admit by department or college for graduate studies.
It is much more difficult to switch from one PhD program to another, as you not only have to apply again and be admitted by the department offering the degree, but you must take the PhD qualifying exam in your new program. Also, depending on how closely aligned the fields are, coursework taken in your original program may or may not be applicable to your new program. It is generally easier to switch Master's programs but still will normally require a new application.
Many departments or colleges limit the number of courses you can apply to a graduate degree taken in another program. In the Master's program I teach in, it is three, and they must be courses that would have reasonable application to our degree. We routinely accept students changing programs, unless their academic performance was sub-par in their previous program, i.e. any Cs, even if their GPA is satisfactory, and/or any course failures.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/04 | 587 | 2,493 | <issue_start>username_0: Quite often, graduate level research is done by researchers from different institutions, whether different universities or cooperation between a university and a private corporation.
How do the researchers get to know each other? How does the collaboration begin?<issue_comment>username_1: Go to a conference/workshop. Ask intelligent questions in talks. Talk to speakers afterwards. (Have your advisor introduce you if you're shy.) Eat lunch with them and their students. Hang out in the hallways. Talk about your research. Listen to other people talk about their research. Listen to gossip. Throw in a few dirty jokes. Grab some coffee, or beer. Scribble on napkins. Go out for dinner with the students. Drink. Play pool. Try that new absinthe place around the corner. Scribble on napkins. Throw up in the alley. Stumble home. Sleep. Grab coffee. Run into someone you met at the absinthe place. Commiserate about your hangovers. Talk about your research. Scribble on napkins. Have a good idea. Skip the next four hours of talks. Fly home. Exchange drafts over email/github. Chat on Skype. Revise, revise, revise. Submit to the next conference. Repeat.
**Very important:** Do *not* skip the first 15 steps.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The key is really to widen your connections and make yourself known, and this can be done in several ways. To socialize in meetings (a la username_1) is certainly one way. Personally I have never found collaborators that quickly, sometimes you strike up a conversation (at a meeting or through other means) and maybe years down the line, the right idea comes up where this collaboration gets started. So as with many scientific discoveries, collaborations may start where you least exepct it and with persons you have known for long for other reasons. Hence making yourself known for good science may attract other persons to contact you as will you with those you can see common ground. Becoming a "known player" (however you want to interpret it) in the field is also likely to provide results in the long term. I would also add that you should listen and learn from colleagues about other people. I do not mean gossip, but rather the way other scientists are thought of. This will prepare you for contacting them. Another example of get known and know your surroundings. Finally, also remmeber that we are all different in how we interact and there is therefore no single way to strike up collaborations.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/04 | 1,180 | 4,855 | <issue_start>username_0: I do understand that citations should be as precise as possible (including e.g. edition of a book or a page number), so that ideally, the reader can find the information exactly as I found it when writing.
I also understand that the problem with citing webpages is that they can change. But how does including the date when I accessed the page help anything? The reader still won't be able to read the same version I did (unless the page includes history, which is very rare). And comparing the accessed date with the current date isn't very helpful either: some webpages change multiple times per day, some aren't modified for years.
Or is the accessed date useful for some other purpose?<issue_comment>username_1: A URL does not refer to content, it is only an address. Since you are making a claim about what was written at that address, you must associate a date with it, or it is meaningless.
If you do such a thing, you should also save the content, in case it is not recoverable and you want to refer to it again or support it further.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not aware of any published accounts of how style rules are developed. If you really want to know why a particular rule was developed, you need to ask them directly. That said, there are a number of different styles for dealing with electronic materials and these styles are changing:
* MLA: You always need the date of access for electronic resources.
+ At some point the since 2014, the requirement has been dropped: <https://style.mla.org/access-dates/>
* APA: You rarely use the date of retrieval, although in previous versions (APA 5) you always did
* CMS: You never need the date of access/retrieval. I am not sure if you ever did in earlier versions.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If you know the URL and date, you may be able to use [The Internet Archives](http://archive.org/web/) (a.k.a. the Wayback Machine) to see the page, if it didn't change too frequently.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Most URL cited are institutional sources, the kind of guys that can provide reliable information\*. If a reader finds that your claim does not coincide with the information they can find at the moment, they can contact the administrators of the page and ask. Certainly, it is easier to get the correct copy if you have an specific date.
In Bioinformatics it is common to use web servers to run some programs ([example](http://octopus.cbr.su.se/)). In this cases, the dates are important for replicability, even when citing the program version, because the specific software versions it depends on may not be public (say, before March 15th, AwesomePredictor.com had installed BLAST+ 2.1, and after then they installed v2.2).
---
* One could cite less formal sites to support side points like "this and that have been in the focus of popular culture", but these are ephemeral by nature.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I found an answer directly from a style guide. According to the [APA Blog (6th edition)](https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2014/08/when-to-include-retrieval-dates-for-online-sources.html),
>
> [W]e usually don’t ask, “*When* did you consult that source?” One exception to this rule would be for material that is subject to frequent change, such as [Wikipedia entries](https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2009/10/how-to-cite-wikipedia-in-apa-style.html). Because this information is designed to be constantly updated, it’s important to let readers know when you retrieved it.
>
>
>
You can check the revision history of Wikipedia (though usually a poor academic source) but it isn't the only site that has a public record like that. Stack Exchange sites do too, as do many software documentation sites (through GitHub). Still other sites have private revision histories that an admin has access to. (For example, WordPress sites.)
Another answer brought up archival sites like [archive.org](https://archive.org/web/). If the page wasn't updated, but the URL no longer works, then most likely you will only need to check one entry to find the information: the first. (You may also be able to search the internet instead to see if the page moved by using the other details, namely title and author.) But with a frequently updated source, it's possible that the cited information only appeared in a single revision of the page. Without knowing which, you'd have to check every snapshot (excluding those after the citation was published). And with an external archival site, the page could have changed between snapshots, so it's a good idea to save the page yourself if you're citing it. However, the comments on the APA article indicate that they believe archival sources to be secondary sources, so the URL of the original is what should go in the citation list.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/04 | 1,929 | 8,542 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently, I was involved in an engineering research project where I significantly extended the *main* functionality of the work. As my other team-mates were not involved in that aspect of the project, I thought I would leave them to do the write-up. I don't want to complicate things but lets just say their contribution matters *less*, at least according to my advisor.
This work is now being readied for publication and there's the matter of ordering the authors. Initially I thought we may be doing things alphabetically, but on the recent draft the order appeared to prioritize those who are doing the write-up, listing them first. My advisor raised no objection to this. If we are going down this road, it seems to me those who have done the most work should be first authors (i.e. me), rather than those who are doing the write-up.
I'd like to avoid any potential conflict with the people involved, and so I wonder if one acceptable compromise here is to specify the contributions of each author in the paper. Alternatively, we can do the alphabetical thing and make explicit mention of this as a footnote. I don't have any problem with either of these options.
First, am I correct in thinking that the ordering here is misplaced?
Second, are the compromises I list reasonable enough to propose?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I thought I would leave them to do the write-up
>
>
>
In my experience, the person who writes the initial draft is first author when the author order depends on contribution. There may be discussions/"fights" over who deserves to write the initial draft, but it is generally understood that this person becomes the first author.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **You must discuss this issue with your advisor and all coauthors as soon as possible.** The right time to have the discussion would have been *before* the first draft is started, but unless you have a time machine, you have to have it now. Since there are differing opinions, and the outcome matters, conflict is inevitable. Welcome to adulthood.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have been in the situation where I have been the primary author on a few papers where others have been the primary personnel involved.
In one of those cases, the PI was the primary worker, and therefore allowed me to be first author. In the other case, the primary worker was still the first author, and I was the second author. I was fine with this, because I was getting the credit in exchange for making sure the work got published.
However, I do agree that the primary person whose work is being presented *should* be first author. At the same time, if you do not have an active hand in writing the manuscript, the claim that slightly less scientific work plus more work preparing the manuscript could be persuasive.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think you should had discussed this issue before starting the research. For example you could have agreed that anybody who solves the main part of the problem (project) will be the first author. But now that it is done, I think you should talk about it with your advisor and you might have to be a little flexible about the order of authorship.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Ordering names in publications is a very delicate matter and should always be discussed among the research team before submission.
Typically, every co-author needs to have taken part in each part of the research:
* background research
* methodology
* **experiment**
* analysis
* **paper writing**
* proof-reading
The importance of those elements determines who will be the first author. The most important parts are definitely the experiment itself and the paper writing. Whoever didn't take part in both of those can hardly be considered an author. This might be considered a bit controversial sometimes, but other researchers who only took part in a small part of the process should be added in the acknowledgements instead.
Now, in many cases nowadays not everybody takes part in each part of the research process. This usually creates ambiguities, that should be solved in the best way, asking for advice from a research authority, with the enough experience and information to judge on the situation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: In my opinion, whatever the order of authors, the contributions should be individually stated, as it is common in some fields and journals. This avoids problems like yours, and also (real cases):
* The first author just provided the research money, but did no actual work.
* The first author is the PI in a collaboration. He overseed the research and gave orders, but the bulk of the job was done by his PhD students.
* Someone is important in the group, so he gets to be amongst the first authors, even though he did nothing. Students that actually did work have their names after him.
* The data was processed using a program that has been in use for three years. The programer was not involved in the paper, or finetuned the program for the purpose of the particular study, but he gets to coauthor.
But also, situations like:
* Three or more researchers designed independent critical steps, all of them equally important to the results.
* Multidisciplinary collaboration, where new analysis techniques suggest new experimental techniques, that are implemented for the first time.
Where they all deserve large credit, and it is impossible to order them fairly.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: Author ordering is a common source of friction and is very tricky. In science and engineering most big universities place critical emphasis on the intellectual contribution over all else. The standards for authorship, and the ordering, do vary somewhat by discipline and institution. In Computational Geometry (a branch of Computer Science), for example, it has been commonplace to list authors alphabetically. In most of the rest of Computer Science, authors are usually listed by the "size" of their contribution.
If the paper has a very "big" important idea then conceptual contribution will be relatively more important. If the paper describes a fairly well-understood concept (which means it might have limited impact) then the author ordering may depend more heavily on other factors like doing the writeup. If team members made very different kinds of contributions it can be very hard to determine the ordering, but then the relative positions aside from first and last are likely to matter less.
In my opinion, doing the actual writeup is usually not the most important factor, but it sometimes becomes the dominant factor since it is easy to measure as a contribution, come last (which makes it easy to remember), and because the people doing the writeup have the initiative and control of the manuscript. Since it is such a delicate and awkward issue, the writers who put the names down in the document first often manage to set the precedent. Notably, the most important positions in the author list are first and last position (both are generally seen as good).
To quote from the Harvard Med School authorship guidelines:
>
> "Examples of authorship policies include descending order of
> contribution, placing the person who took the lead in writing the
> manuscript or doing the research first and the most experienced
> contributor last, and alphabetical or random order."
> [Harvard](http://hms.harvard.edu/about-hms/integrity-academic-medicine/hms-policy/faculty-policies-integrity-science/authorship-guidelines)
>
>
>
The IEEE authorship guide states:
>
> Typically, the first author listed is the person who has taken the
> most responsibility for the work. Other authors are listed in order of
> the level of their contribution.
>
>
>
[IEEE link, PDF file](http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/authors/author_guide_interactive.pdf)
(which doesn't actually help you much since the definition of "contribution" is not apparent.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I think it is very strange if people "who didn't do the work" get to do the writeup. Whoever did the research is intimately familiar with the methods and results, and is in best position to make the judgement calls of what to include or leave out, were exactly the difficulties and successes are, what is the real contributions are and what is incidental. Sure, somebody periperally involved can look it over and do proofreading or editing, but not structuring and initial writeup.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/05 | 611 | 2,642 | <issue_start>username_0: My University is currently on break, so I'd be making the appointment by email, and then meeting separately to discuss it.
In the email, is it a good idea to say explicitly that the appointment is regarding letters of recommendation? It seems like it would be, but on the other hand that seems tantamount to "asking via email," which of course is frowned upon when we're in the same city. Any thoughts?<issue_comment>username_1: Just write the email right now asking for the letter. If you feel sheepish about "asking over email," just say "I'm sorry I didn't have a chance to ask you in person, but because we're on break, I wasn't sure how long it would take to set up a meeting."
The number 1 courtesy issue with asking for letters of recommendation is promptness and giving your writers as much time as possible to write and submit the letters. I think that completely overrides any concerns about medium, especially when it's not necessarily easy to meet with the person in question right away. I'd certainly much rather get an email about submitting letters than to go to the trouble of specially setting up a meeting with some amount of delay. (In fact, when students do ask me in person, I usually tell them to sent me an email about it so I have a permanent record of the request).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This may vary between departments, countries (I'm in the U.S.), etc., but I'd say:
1. When making an appointment, it's almost always a good idea to specify what it will be about. When someone doesn't have a lot of time, this helps them figure out how soon the meeting needs to be scheduled, and it gives them a chance to prepare for it. The one exception I can think of is very delicate topics. For example, if you are meeting with someone to discuss an ethical matter, there might not be a short description you can give that wouldn't risk be misleading or omitting important context.
2. I'm not aware of a belief that asking for a letter of recommendation via e-mail is rude or problematic (although of course this may depend on the local culture). In fact, I would prefer to be asked by e-mail. Partly it's just because I generally prefer e-mail for things that can be handled that way, since it's less disruptive. Partly it's because awkward situations are a little easier for me to handle by e-mail. For example, if a student didn't do well in my course, I may point this out and ask whether there's someone else who could write a more compelling letter. It's easier for me to find the right words in writing, rather than on the fly in a conversation.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/01/06 | 1,005 | 4,203 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in Computer Science. I read a [survey](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4553339&contentType=Conference+Publications&searchField%3DSearch_All%26queryText%3DA+brave+new+world+synchronization+games) today. The author gave such a good result by the end of the article that I think the research question can be called "closed": the result performance is ideal and I think the problem is not worth researching any more; future developers can simply use the algorithms proposed and things should be fine. However, the **author of the survey** did not say so -- they did not say that the problem is solved, nor did they said anything about future work.
I believe (in this specific case), that the problem is solved:
1. The research goal is to reduce network latency. By the time the survey was written (year 2008), the result latency was 100ms. With such latency, human users won't notice a network delay, because that only happens when the latency exceeds 150ms.
2. The authors of the survey did not publish any paper on optimizing the algorithms after that survey.
Does these mean that the problem is safely closed? If so, why didn't the survey authors say that? If not, why didn't they continue working on it? How would I know whether a research question is solved or not?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think a research question is every “closed”, as you say, though it's of course a matter of vocabulary. In the example you mention, it seems clearly that there is **no current incentive to design better solutions**, but unless it is actually proven that there can be none, it's not a solved-and-closed question, it's a “we don't actually need to do better” question. This makes all the difference in the world.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'd like to expand on <NAME>'s answer, because your question and his answer bear on a more general problem: when is a problem worth solving? Or viceversa, should one care about a paper solving this problem? I'll present the answer I've grown up with (as a PhD student), though I've seen wildly different opinions on this, so I don't think there's a fully objective view (though characterizing the spectrum of opinions is what matters here).
I've learned that it's up to the author to motivate the reader to care about the paper ("sell one's research"), though others might disagree; nowadays this is necessary because of the research-literature overload we live in. In applied fields, a common motivation is a set of (possibly indirect) applications. Different kind of motivations exist, but I'll conjecture that even good theoretical work should matter to other theoretical work to be good, and then leave other motivation out of scope.
Would you accept a paper (1) solving this latency problem for websites interacting with users? By your reasoning, I wouldn't (at least, not at a top venue). But let's assume that again <NAME> submits a paper (2) on the topic. It first convinces readers that better latency matters by describing some application (say high-frequency trading, assuming this actually applies). Then, paper (2) solves the problem exactly like paper (1) above. The second paper could get past the same reviewers. I might even argue that with that motivation (assuming it's good), he might create a research question. And in some cases, simply motivating well a research question might be enough for a paper.
To demonstrate that wildly different opinions exist, I'll offer two opposite examples.
* I've seen a reviewer explain that a paper was good research but he wasn't sure whether it addressed any relevant problem; the reviewer concluded with a strong accept judgement. (Of course I won't share details).
* On the other hand, Tanenbaum's Modern Operating Systems book explains that some research had the only point of [keeping otherwise unemployed graph theorists off the streets](http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1410217), because (it is hinted) the problem lacked actual applications.
Other examples of researchers questioning the motivation of other research abound, but I won't add further anecdotical evidence.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/06 | 1,629 | 6,885 | <issue_start>username_0: In recent years, several organizations (publishers, arXiv, universities) started pushing for systems of a reliable author identification, gaining considerable traction with the recent launch of ORCID. This works by assigning IDs to persons. In some cases, the person itself can then connect his/her articles to the person ID. In other cases, publishers ask / plan to ask for the ID upon manuscript submission.
Examples:
* ORCID (supported among others by Spinger, Elsevier, American Physical Society, American Chemical Society, IEEE, Institute of Physics)
* ResearcherID by <NAME>
* Scopus Author ID
There are some obvious advantages of a precise and machine-readable author identification. These pros are strongly advocated by the big organizations, which are of course very interested. But what about the cons? Before all researchers become obliged to using such IDs, we should discuss the cons and potential problems.
What do you think and what are the biggest potential disadvantages for the authors? Do you know some nice article / blog / discussion about disadvantages?
---
Related texts:
* <http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/03/11/the-author-id-dilemma/>
* <http://blogs.plos.org/mfenner/author-identifier-overview/><issue_comment>username_1: Your question is long and somewhat argumentative. I'll answer here to a small part of it. You say:
>
> *“Are you sure that you will still be proud of your last paper in 20 years time? In some cases you might prefer to not include a certain article in your next grant/job application.”*
>
>
>
To me, the sounds very contradictory with the principles and aims of scientific publishing, regardless of how identification is performed. Once something is published under your name, it is part of the academic record and should not disappear, even if you don't like it anymore.
It is actually a **very good thing** that the integrity of the academic record, including published literature, is maintained throughout history. It is even part of scholarly publishers' duties to do so. That it is associated with your name and affiliation(s), or with a unique identifier, doesn't change naught. To given an example, if an academic were to produce a full list of publications (as part of a long CV or grant application) and willingly omit a publication from this list, I would consider it unethical (though I don't think it is something that often happens).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A few possible problems:
1) Such an ID system seems a little intrusive. It would impose something like an obligatory Facebook for researchers.
2) Everyone's research output could then be identified reliably (in machine-readable form) and used for all sorts of data mining. Among the possible uses some may not be desirable for everyone:
2a) Algorithmic rating of a researcher's output becomes very simple for
anyone interested. It might reinforce the tendency for people to judge by some computed rank, instead of actually looking at the content of the articles.
2b) Authors might be tempted to optimize their (machine generated) rankings by annoying tricks.
2c) People could easily study the "graph of your collaborators" etc. (adding to point 1).
3) You lose every control over the communication about your publication list. Instead of being able to present it yourself to others it is stored in a public database to which you have no access. Hence, you cannot choose anymore whether you want to present your publication list to others in machine-readable form or not, and whether you want to present the full list, or (for what ever reason) a certain subset.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: One downside that hasn't been mentioned yet: *if* the administrators of this system collect and record everyone's email addresses, then this has some disadvantages for researchers.
A big targeted database with e-mail addresses, research interests, institutes and whatsnot has a great value for advertising companies.
I am sure we all get enough spam, and a fraction of it is researcher-targeted spam: vanity press, dubious publishers, cash-cow conferences. Wouldn't they all like to have more addresses?
Moreover, many of us are going to be working actively to keep our profile up-to-date and accurate; we will be basically working for free to build and check such a database. Many of us are already doing this for Google Scholar.
If the database contains email addresses, access to them needs to be strictly regulated; any form of machine and automated access in particular. If there is a commercial entity behind it, that is another major concern. A private firm can be sold to evil stakeholders, or can go bankrupt and have to sell the database. Even if the database owners do not do anything, a simple hacker attack can expose a well-structured database of the e-mail addresses of most professional researchers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In mathematics, we already have a database of this sort - two them, in fact, with in [MathSciNet](http://www.ams.org/mathscinet) and [Zentralblatt MATH](http://www.zentralblatt-math.org/zmath/en/). Both aim to be comprehensive for mathematics publications, going back to the 1940s. It is completely standard for me to use this to get a list of every publication (in mathematics) by a fellow mathematician, and anyone can do it about me. These data have indeed been used to perform scientific analysis of collaboration patterns, which are somewhat fascinating, as in [this paper](http://www.siam.org/pdf/news/485.pdf).
So, if there were going to be cons, this might be a fruitful place to look for them. As someone in the field, the main cons that I see are not with the fact that the database is public and complete - after all, the point of publishing is to make a paper public. The main issues I have are with the relationship between the database and my day-to-day workflow:
* Occasionally, publications outside academia may not be present. For example, if someone publishes a chapter of a popular book, or writes editorials based on their professional knowledge, these may not be indexed.
* The system is still only marginal for getting actual copies of the papers that are indexed. This has gotten slightly better over time, but I generally still have to google the title of the paper to look for preprints, copies on the author's webpage, etc. The system has slowly been adding links to the publisher's canonical page for each paper.
* As far as I know there is no way for me to add a link to my personal webpage to either system.
* Papers only appear in the database after publication, which can be years after they were presented at conferences and well known to the research community. So someone in a distant location would find it hard to keep at the cutting edge of research solely looking at the databases.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/01/06 | 2,419 | 10,181 | <issue_start>username_0: Let's list important factors for evaluation of a job candidate (for research post doc, assistant professor, tenure track, etc):
1. Research experience (research articles, research talks, expository articles, perhaps books).
2. Teaching experience (tutoring, undergraduate courses, graduate courses, etc).
3. Academic background (grades, the university of graduation, current affiliation, etc).
4. Reference (who is writing reference letter and how he is writing it).
5. Personal (natural) features (nationality, race, language, etc).
6. Social and family status (connections, marriage, etc).
7. Other factors (you name it).
I have been in job market for several years. I was always wondering how do the above factors affect my job application in different academic institutions? I would like to know the approximate percentage of importance of these factors in different institutions.
And my second question is How the hiring committees evaluate a candidate? Is it based on reference letters, CV, list of publications, research statement, teaching statement?
My impression is reference letters are very important at least for the first job after PhD. Am I right?<issue_comment>username_1: Your question is fairly general, but the title implies that you want to ask about mathematics. I think the more general question makes sense, so I'll answer that one, based on my experience in computer science in the US
Among the criteria you list, (1) and (4) (research and letters) are usually the most important in research-oriented universities. (3) academic background (but not grades) plays a role in initial filtering but usually takes second place to (1)/(4) once people get some familiarity with the candidate.
It is rare that (2) plays a role, unless the job calls for significant teaching, or is in a teaching-oriented university. Since math folks teach a lot more than CS folks, this might be one point of difference.
Many of the factors listed in (5) cannot be considered legally, and rightly so. I seriously doubt that (6) plays a direct role, but personal connections can help open doors, much like (3).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll second username_1’s generic answer (I'm a chemist myself), but I'll add a few points: first, one of the reasons that teaching skills usually play little role in hiring decisions is that they are much harder to evaluate/quantify than research skills. Most people in the hiring committee will be researchers or think they know how research should be evaluated. Most of them don't know how to evaluate teaching skills (and if they did, they hardly have time to do it anyway).
Regarding 5, it probably depends on the country, but some of these can be serious barriers for employment: language is the most important one, especially if teaching is involved. At least in France, most university won't recruit at the junior level someone who doesn't speak French, as that is the language in which undergrad courses are taught. Nationality can also be a stopper in specific circumstances (nuclear research, for one thing).
Finally, I think an important factor you did not list is the performance of the candidate in interviews with the hiring committee: self-assurance, conveying the impression of someone well-prepared, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't have anything essentially divergent to say from the other answers, but since you inquired about mathematics specifically and I am a mathematician who has been (and currently am) involved in postdoctoral and tenure track hiring, I thought it might be useful for me to weigh in as well. Lacking true inspiration, let me just comment on your criteria.
(Let me also assume that we are talking about jobs at a "research university", as it seems you are.)
>
> Research experience (research articles, research talks, expository articles, perhaps books).
>
>
>
Mathematicians are judged on a combination of research *promise* and research *success*: as you get older, one looks increasingly for evidence that the former has been converted into the latter. However, for every kind of research job in mathematics, they are hiring you on the basis of the work they expect you to do in the future. So, for instance, if you have already solved a major problem, you can coast on that for a time but after a while people want to hear what you are working on now. Research talks are probably the best way of exploring the dichotomy between past and future research: as such, they are very important whenever they exist, which is almost always on the tenure track job market and in a small (but perhaps increasing?) minority of postdoctoral jobs.
Expository articles generally do not count towards the research component of your application. (If someone is counting papers, then if you have 8 research papers and 1 expository paper then people will probably say you have 9 papers altogether, so it counts a little bit. But *if pressed*, its value could contract considerably: e.g. if there are worries that a candidate has too few papers, than a paper viewed as expository will probably not allay this worry.) Strategically it is probably best to advertise expository articles as having some teaching / mentoring / service component, if at all possible.
With regard to writing books: one of my most distinguished colleagues, <NAME>, wrote [an excellent and rather successful book](http://alpha.math.uga.edu/%7Elorenz/book.html) near the beginning of his career. He now tells anyone who will listen that junior faculty should not write books. Of course sometimes the heart wants what it wants, but from a strategic perspective I think this is eminently sound, and I say this as someone who may turn around and write some books now that I am solidly into my mid-career.
>
> Teaching experience (tutoring, undergraduate courses, graduate courses, etc).
>
>
>
*Successful teaching experiences* are indeed valued for a research job. At most research universities teaching is still a main component of one's job and, especially, of one's promotion and tenure packages. Most research departments are looking most of the time for *thoroughly solid* teachers rather than especially brilliant or innovative ones. Your teaching dossier should convey most of all that the department who hires you will never have to think about your teaching in a negative way.
Some graduate students do not get to do instruction at all (as opposed to TA work: grading, leading problem sessions, and so forth). There is a big difference between TA work and instruction, and as a hirer I am very wary of candidates who attempt to convince me that they will be a successful instructor based only on TA experience. I would strongly advise every math graduate student to be the instructor of record for at least one successful undergraduate course (where "successful" means you can get a strong teaching letter out of the experience).
Teaching experience at the graduate level is almost unheard of for graduate students and is far from guaranteed in postdocs. Even within my own department, some of my colleagues feel strongly that postdocs should teach topics graduate courses in their areas of interest, whereas other colleagues feel that it is the job of the tenure track faculty to teach these courses. I lean more towards the latter, and I don't feel that teaching graduate courses is an important part of a tenure track job application: I would be equally impressed or more with other kinds of interactions with the graduate program, e.g. participating in or organizing seminars, reading theses, and so forth.
I'm having a hard time thinking about how tutoring experience could play a significant role. If you have founded the Khan Academy or the [Euclid Lab](http://euclidlab.org/), you would probably get some attention / consideration for this. Much less and your employers are unlikely to care.
>
> Academic background (grades, the university of graduation, current affiliation, etc).
>
>
>
No research university that I know of asks for grades or transcripts for candidates for faculty positions. Of course your *pedigree* -- i.e., where you did your undergraduate and graduate work, and your current institution -- is of some importance, but not *that* much importance. Anyway, what's done is done here: presumably you took what opportunities you could to attend / work at better, rather than worse, institutions!
>
> Reference (who is writing reference letter and how he is writing it).
>
>
>
Or she! When you are applying for your first postdoc, your adviser's letter may well be the *most* important part of the application: most graduates, even very strong ones, cannot speak about their research accomplishments and near future goals as convincingly as their advisers can. Later on your adviser's letter gets less important, but you probably get more letters overall, and they are always a key part of the application.
>
> Personal (natural) features (nationality, race, language, etc).
>
>
>
In the United States it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race. Nationality is probably a no-go as well. Language issues are important: if English is not your native language, employers will (or at any rate, should) look carefully at your skills.
>
> Social and family status (connections, marriage, etc).
>
>
>
Professional connections can be important; e.g. they come out in recommendation letters and in your academic pedigree. It is illegal for employers to inquire about your marital status, sexual orientation, or whether you have children. It is not illegal for you to bring these things up, and if you have a "two-body problem" -- i.e., a partner who is also an academic -- than you should do so at some point, and that brings an extra layer of complication to the process. But if a candidate is not looking for an academic job for her partner, I honestly don't care at all whether she is married, gay, celibate, and so forth. I can assure you that in most American departments any such talk about these matters in the context of a hiring discussion would be rapidly quelled.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2013/01/08 | 662 | 2,807 | <issue_start>username_0: I have just completed a PhD by research, which I think has some merits in being available as a book (This is, of course, my personal opinion). The research cuts across several fields (e.g. sociology, public policy).
I am wondering what I need to do to take the next step.
In particular:
1. How do you turn an academic piece like the dissertation (which is written for the examiners) into a book (which is for the general public)?
2. How do I find publishers who specialise in my field?<issue_comment>username_1: Your first question is quite tricky (to answer and to do). It depends on what you mean by "the public". A version for academics needs little change from a thesis. For students you need to consider how to highlight what can be learnt from your work. For the *general* general public, you'll have to start thinking about rewriting perhaps quite a bit, keeping your language accessible and building a narrative. As I am in a different field, perhaps some or all of this is already a part of your thesis.
The second question is simpler, who publishes the books that you read for your thesis?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As a partial answer, Springer used to publish (theoretically) outstanding PhD thesis in Mathematics in its 'Lecture notes in Mathematics' as research monograph. However I do not know how many of the published volumes are Phd thesis. Definitely a (math) thesis requires a lot of polishing and rewriting before publishing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If your university does not require you to publish your dissertation as a book, I would be very reluctant to invest the time needed to get your dissertation published. I would put the PDF of your dissertation on your own website, making it available to everyone who wants to look at it. I would spend the time needed to rewrite your book on writing more peer reviewed articles. Either by publishing chapters from your dissertation, or by doing new research. I think publications are more important than a book, especially for someone like you who still has only a few publications.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Why do you want the book?
* For prestige?: publishers who contact you, don't do any review and charge high prices will only increase your prestige to those that don't know them (and these are probably not those you want to impress).
* For dissemination?: why not just put the pdf available (as was already recommended)?. Those who are interested will find it, those who are not will probably not buy a PhD thesis
* For money?: I doubt you will really make much out of it.
My recommendation: put it as a pdf on your website / your school's dissertation repository. If you see that lot's of people download it, consider an improved version as book.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/08 | 624 | 2,801 | <issue_start>username_0: In my research, I've found two articles that are completely identical, except the abstract and authors names. They are published on different conferences, with one year between.
What should (must) I do in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: The programme committees for the conferences would be the appropriate authorities to contact (it is their responsibility to deal with plagiarism within their conference). This is of course complicated by the fact the conferences are in the past; the current programme committee may have little or nothing to do with the earlier committee, the steering committee may be more appropriate in this case.
If neither are responsive, contacting the publication venue may be required. If the proceedings are published by a journal or reputable publisher, they should be able to resolve the issue (they have copyright laws to deal with!).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If the author sets on the two papers are disjoint, then it looks like a case of real plagiarism. If you are not an author on any of these papers, I'd suggest notifying the authors of the earlier publication of the other paper, and leave further steps to them. Alternatively, if the conference of the earlier publication has been sponsored by a reputable organization, you could try to inform this organization.
If the author sets are not disjoint, we have what is typically called "self-plagiarism". I don't like this term, because this is by far not as severe as real plagiarism. Still, in case the earlier publication has a copyright mark by some publishing company or scientific organization, you may consider informing them.
Note that you are not really obliged to take any action. Just if you want to cite the work, you should make sure to cite the original, not the plagiated work. This would normally be the earlier publication.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Actually it sometimes occurs that essentially the same paper is published multiple times in the proceedings of different conferences sponsored by the same society and handled by the same publisher.
I personally disagree strongly with this but it is tolerated in some cases, on the grounds that proceedings to different conferences reach different audiences (especially if the events are well separated in time). In the case I'm familiar with, it was enough for the authors to indicate in a footnote to the 2nd paper that this work has already been presented at conference YYY. Obviously such duplications cannot involve two *completely* distinct sets of authors. (I've never heard this done "across publisher" as this could be problematic from a copyright perspective.)
You need to contact the publishers with this information, and let them deal with any follow up inquiry.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/09 | 851 | 3,661 | <issue_start>username_0: Currently I am finishing my masters (one year) in economics at a Canadian university and am intending to apply to Canadian universities to do a PhD.
The issue I have is that in the courses I had taken last semester the professors were closed to student contact making it near impossible to build relationships.
For my applications I intended to rely upon professors from my undergraduate university that know me quite well and who I know will write high-quality letters.
A colleague of mine mentioned that when applying for a PhD program, it is expected that my references will come from my masters university and it is generally not acceptable practice to have references from the undergraduate one.
Is this actually the case? If so, what is the best course of action?<issue_comment>username_1: A Ph.D. program is about research. Have you done research? If not, how do you know you want to study for a Ph.D.?
It is *your* responsibility to seek out opportunities for research.
Protestations that your professors were not open to communication are not likely to be viewed positively by an admissions committee.
If you've had some research experiences, have you considered asking those you worked with for a recommendation letter? If you haven't had any research experience, that will make it significantly harder to be admitted into a Ph.D. program, no matter who writes your letters.
And if you haven't been inspired to seek out opportunities to get involved in research, that would make me wonder whether you will truly enjoy a Ph.D. program. Going to a Ph.D. program "by default" or because "that's what everyone is doing" is a terrible idea; you should only join a Ph.D. program if you are passionate and excited about doing research, because that's what you are going to be spending most of your time doing in a Ph.D. program, and that is what Ph.D. programs are designed to prepare you for. So, you might also want to do a little bit of soul-searching to figure out whether a Ph.D. program truly is the right direction for you. If it's not, it's much better to find out now rather than after spending several years in a Ph.D. program.
It is acceptable to have letters of reference from a mixture of your undergraduate and your masters university. People would probably ask questions if all of your letters were from your undergraduate university and none were from your masters university. That might make the admissions committee wonder: What were you doing with your time at the M.S. program? Why didn't you seek out opportunities to get involved in research and other activities beyond coursework? Is there some hidden story? (For instance, did you completely alienate all the professors in your M.S. program? Or, do you have little self-drive to do research? Or, maybe you have little experience with research, and thus no idea whether you are good at and enjoy research, and thus little basis to judge whether a Ph.D. program is a good fit for you.)
That said, the most important thing is to have letters from people who know you well, and who know well how to evaluate candidates for Ph.D. programs. So, which professors (or other established researchers) know you well and can best comment on your research ability or research potential?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Not really. It is assumed that if you are a good student you would be able to get good reference letters from your masters courses. It would have to be from your undergraduate thesis advisor or some sort of exceptional activity you did during undergrad, not just a regular class with a good grade, if at all.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/09 | 689 | 3,079 | <issue_start>username_0: Every journal has strict rules about duplicate submissions, and I do not mean publishing the paper in 2 venues.
My approach is mostly from an economics point of view: Given the fact that most reviews take between 2-3 months, plus any number of months for a resubmission, limiting yourself to only one journal seems not only a waste of time for the individual, but an overall drag for the scientific community. Even if you make a groundbreaking discovery, it won't get published until about a year later.
Multiple submissions dramatically increase the chances of getting your work published, and if you get accepted in both, you can always pull out your paper. From a marketplace point of view, this makes sense, since in this way, journals would be fighting for authors and not the other way around.
Models like Arxiv have proven that this is not such a crazy idea<issue_comment>username_1: One possible answer is that the referee process of a paper is a very professional and time consuming job (at least I am sure it is in mathematics). Therefore it is not fair you submit your paper to several journals and make them to referee your paper by different experts and then you withdraw your paper just because your paper got accepted by another journal.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think there are three reasons.
1. From the publishers' perspective they want to squash competition.
They want to know that if they invest the time and resources to
evaluate the paper that they have a very good chance of publishing
it. I don't particularly like how the publishing industry currently
works and I might argue that this is in fact a reason to double
submit.
2. The second reason is about the reviewer and editor resources. These
are our colleagues and wasting their time is not fair. As a reviewer
I want to know that if I put time and effort into a review, that my
comments will be considered. Even if my review leads to a rejection,
you will likely think about the feedback before resubmitting.
3. Having little or no cost associated with multiple submissions reduces
the effectiveness of the peer review process. You increase the
chance of finding a set of reviewers who miss flaws and potentially
ignore reviewers who find flaws.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: If the point of publication was to get it published as quickly as possible, then there might be some merit to your argument. But the point of **peer-reviewed** publication is to have the community vet your work and certify its basic soundness (not value/impact necessarily - that's a different story).
In that case, the delay involved in publication is a problem that needs to be fixed, but you shouldn't fix it by allowing multiple instances of peer-review.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: One reason could be- if the paper gets accepted at both the venues, then you'll have to decide which venue is better. You could have thought about this before submitting also, so to avoid loss of time of the reviewers, you should do it before.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/09 | 454 | 1,942 | <issue_start>username_0: When you accept a tenure-track position in the USA, how long are you expected to stay? Does it look bad if you change jobs a couple times after a few years at each university? Is there an unspoken standard?<issue_comment>username_1: This can be a little tricky. There are two issues: what your obligations are to the university, and what could look bad on your CV and hurt future job searches.
Your legal obligations may vary depending on the country or the details of your contract, but my understanding of the U.S. social norms is the following:
Once you have accepted a job, you must show up for it. (I.e., you will offend people if you try to change your mind and accept another job instead.) You should stay for at least a year, except for health emergencies and the like, and preferably for a couple of years, since it looks bad if you apply for other jobs immediately upon arriving. Beyond that, the department may be unhappy if you leave, but you won't be doing anything offensive.
On the other hand, you shouldn't make a habit of this. When a department hires someone for a tenure-track job, they are looking for a long-term colleague. It's still possible to get hired even if the department knows you are unlikely to stay long, but you have to be extra-brilliant to make up for this. If you leave a couple of universities quickly, then it will look like a pattern, and everyone else will be less interested in hiring you than they might otherwise have been.
If you end up in this situation through bad luck, then the next time you apply for jobs you should try to explain what happened in a way that makes it clear why it is unlikely to happen again.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Future employers might interpret your flightiness as your acknowledgement that you won't meet tenure requirements, thus leaving before it can be denied. Sooner than later they'll stop short listing you.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/10 | 573 | 2,095 | <issue_start>username_0: I understand there are a number of specialised ePrint archives or repositories where scholarly works could be posted for wider dissemination (for example, [arXiv](http://arxiv.org/)).
I am wondering if there is a preferred one for PhD dissertations in the social sciences?<issue_comment>username_1: You can publish an eprint of your dissertation in [Researchgate.net](https://www.researchgate.net).
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can always put a copy of your dissertation on your professional web page. Google will find it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Your university is likely to have an institutional repository. This is probably the most important place to lodge an electronic copy of your dissertation and should definitely be used.
However, but it won't hurt to lodge the manuscript in other places. As others have noted, there are various ad-hoc options here (e.g. commercial networks like Academia.Edu and ResearchGate, your personal webpage, etc.).
To the best of my knowledge, there is no open access repository for the social sciences that has the same recognition as ArXiv. However, there are a few repositories like [SSOAR](http://www.ssoar.info), [SSRN](http://www.ssrn.com/en/), [EconStor](http://www.econstor.eu/?langselector=en) and [HAL-SHS](http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/index.php?langue=en) that are becoming more widely used.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: [Figshare](http://figshare.com/) is an easy and free option. It is not field specific. It has an backup archiving system. Submitted work tends to get indexed by Google and Google Scholar.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: One more recent place for this is [**SocArXiv**](https://socopen.org/2016/07/09/announcing-the-development-of-socarxiv-an-open-social-science-archive/), currently found [here](http://socarxiv.org), which was started in July 2016, so it is still in development. I'm not sure whether they will end up accepting theses or not (but, in principle, I'd go for a ¿why not? response), but it's worth a look.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/10 | 989 | 3,927 | <issue_start>username_0: As an academic in the university, how do you organize your self from the beginning of a semester?
For example:
* How do you take the absent students names?
* How do prepare your materials?
* How do you write a syllabus for students and do you hand them out?
* What computer programs do you use to plan your lessons?
I started my career as a lecturer last semester and I found myself not organized so I need to learn from your experience.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. For teaching it is a must that you prepare a syllabus. Actually you should also have a time schedule for your syllabus. I would also rethink about the order of the topics and the depth of my presentation as well as the example and exercises that I want to give students.
2. Besides syllabus, I suggest you explain your methods of evaluation including your exams, homeworks, class presentations, etc.
3. Giving a list of useful books and other reading materials is also helpful, especially in advanced courses.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> How do you take the absent students names?
>
>
>
I don't. If a student finds my lectures boring or useless, they shouldn't waste their time coming to class. *(As others point out, there are very good reasons to require attendance in laboratory-, studio-, and discussion-based classes.)*
>
> How do prepare your materials?
>
>
>
Coffee and LaTeX. Lots of coffee and LaTeX.
>
> How do you write a syllabus for students and do you hand them out?
>
>
>
When I started out, I modified the syllabus from the previous iteration of the course, which was taught by an experienced instructor, so I could be sure to include all the necessary details. I used to hand out the syllabus on the first day of class, but now I just post it on the well-advertised course web site.
>
> What computer programs do you use to plan your lessons?
>
>
>
I write everything in LaTeX (specifically, TeXShop) and distribute everything as PDF files on the course web site. (See the first question.) I also use SubEthaEdit to edit the course web pages themselves.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: One issue is not mentioned above, and is very important.
Make sure to state and post policies ahead of time for:
* how you'll deal with late submission of homeworks
* what your policy on cheating/plagiarism is
* any related university policies that students need to be made aware of.
These are more important than you might imagine. At the very least, having the policy allows you to be consistent when dealing with student excuses, and prevents you from having to make up policy as you go along. If someone is caught cheating, it will be important to have an up-front policy that you can point to, otherwise it will be difficult to penalize the student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This semester I'm teaching a brand new course at my university. It's an elective course, so I can be much more of the "mad scientist experimenting."
I have a generic list of topics, and a general plan for the number of lectures during the semester. That means I can organize things loosely, rather than specifying in exhaustive detail what will be covered in each lecture before the start of the semester. Some topics have taken me much less time than I anticipated, and others have run much longer.
I have been using a combination of LaTeX and [MultiMarkdown](http://fletcherpenney.net/multimarkdown) to prepare my lecture notes. I have also made the conscious decision *not* to use slides, but instead to go "old-school" and lecture at the blackboard. I've found this makes the pace of the course slower, and allows me to focus on the major concepts, rather than trying to cram too much material into a single lecture. However, I do publish the lecture notes following the end of each lecture, making it easier for students to keep up with the material.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/10 | 994 | 4,015 | <issue_start>username_0: Sorry if this is off-topic, just close or delete this thread if that is the case.
Is anyone aware of 2-year Masters programs in mathematics that sufficiently prepare a student for a potential PhD, and accepts students who did not do so well (achieve the equivalent of an Australian honours degree) or did not major in mathematics?
It seems to me most masters programs in the UK and Australia are done over 1 year, and require at least Honours div. 2A for entry. While the masters programs from the well-known US universities require the same, and some even need students to pass PhD entrance exams for entry. Anyone familiar with programs that fit the description in the previous paragraph? Prestige really isn't a factor here.<issue_comment>username_1: From a (nostly) Australian perspective:
Do you want Masters by research, or by coursework? I assume by 2A you mean 2nd class 1st division (normally this would be called a 2-1).
Most research Masters degrees (in Australia) are 2 years, and you typically need a 2-2 (or a Desmond... geddit?) for entry (a credit average equivalent), a 2-1 is only needed for the vague hope of an APA scholarship (in practice a 1st is needed for that).
Coursework Masters are typically aimed at professionals to enhance CVs and skill-sets, so they're normally not the route to a PhD (especially in maths), and are usually 1 year.
My experience of the UK system is that it's largely similar to the Australian, though I have spent less time in it, a 2nd class degree is all that's required for entry into a Masters (so 2-2 would be sufficient).
The US system is somewhat different though (but warning, my experience with the US system is from the outside, so take this with a grain of salt). For those looking at a PhD, you typically join a graduate programme, which has 2 years of coursework followed by 3 years of research largely as a single continuous (or at least contiguous) programme. Often the 2 years coursework will gain you a Masters degree, but this is a "Masters in passing", and is not strictly necessary for progression (this set up is also why the entry exams might turn up at the start in the US).
So after all that, what you want to look for is "Masters by research" programmes, normally each department at the university will have some information about it on their website under something like "Postgraduate Study", or similar (perhaps "graduate school" in the US, but read carefully). These are the ones aimed at PhD preparation, though in Australia and the UK, there is typically no or minimal coursework, so if you need to catch up, it's up to you and your supervisor to ensure that this happens.
The less pleasant part is that if you only have a 3rd class degree, then you're going to have a tougher time of it. In this case you may want to talk to academics at the university you're interested in about what you can do to demonstrate appropriate ability. Another option is to bite the bullet and complete a 1 year masters course to attempt to demonstrate that you have the skills and knowledge required. A really extreme suggestion would be to complete another undergraduate degree specifically in mathematics (many universities offer a specific BMath or similar) to close the gap.
Finally, if you're in a position to go for a Masters by research, take some care picking a university that offers research in an area you're interested in. Think about what areas of maths you like, see where the people who do that are and talk to them. The vast majority of academics in Aus./UK/US are keen an interested to talk to people who want to get involved in their area and they tpyically don't stand on ceremony, so you don't have to be too worried about formalities (but be polite of course!).
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest the online master program of John Hopkins University. GRE is not required, and if you are not a math major, you can start with the undergraduate courses.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/10 | 311 | 1,283 | <issue_start>username_0: For a grant I am writing, I need to describe how I mined data from social media sites. I collected data from sites such as Twitter using each site's API and a Python wrapper. In writing my methods, I assume that I should mention which APIs I used, or at least that I used an API.
Do I need to provide a citation if I refer to using, say, the Python wrapper for Twitter's API. If so, how do I do that?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think you'll find any documented correct way to do this. Personally, I would write a sentence saying that I did it, a sentence describing what an API is, and a link to the version-specific API documentation website (i.e., `https://developers.google.com/youtube/v3/` for the API Version 3 instead of `https://developers.google.com/youtube/` the general Youtube API help website).
If you're including code in the submission, consider adding the API code in an appendix.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think there is a standard way, some APIs have a notes sections that have things like citations, and things like that.
Sometimes, the API comes attached to some paper, in which case you should cite the paper.
I've mostly seen people citing the webpage itself if no other resource is available
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/10 | 525 | 2,286 | <issue_start>username_0: I am not based in academia so unsure what the protocols (and the underlying and unwritten conventions are) in regard to getting my first paper published in a peer reviewed journal.
The paper will come out of my PhD dissertation.
How do I start the ball rolling?<issue_comment>username_1: The procedural parts are pretty simple:
1. Select the journal you're interested in submitting to.
2. Read their "Instructions for Authors".
3. *Follow* those instructions.
It may sound trite putting it that way, but journals are typically pretty good at being clear about what they want, both in terms of content areas and format & typography.
What you also need to do is identify what you want to take from your PhD, and determine what the "narrative" structure of that material is - a paper that's just a bunch of random things with no through-line is not a great paper.
You may also want to take the time to look at the editorial board of the journal you're interested in, find who is knowledgeable in the topic of your paper and be sure to indicate (in the manner proscribed in the instructions for authors) that you'd like them to be the editor in charge of your paper. A good choice here can help ensure that it's reviewed by the right people for the job.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: username_1 covered all the necessary points. I am just adding a few supplementary ones. As a PhD student, I can assure you that opinion of your guide regarding the choice of the journal also matters (I mean, he/she wants to send somewhere and you somewhere else can create conflict and better avoided). If you have followed up works of some earlier works, then you can try in the journals where the those earlier papers were published.
One more point. Sometimes it is important to get a quick publication. For which you need to sacrifice a little and go for a journal with fast publication. You did not write your field. In Mathematics and some Theoretical Computer Science journals take an year or more for publication. TCS conference proceeding are faster and many of them are referred (and something like FOCS publication can change your life). Physics journals (theory) are generally fast. To be in safer side, keep a copy in arxiv.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/10 | 1,482 | 6,318 | <issue_start>username_0: I have now completed my PhD by research.
I received support from my supervisor in the form of advice on my chapters (for which I am indebted to him; we have a very good working relationship).
The advice mostly related to clarity of arguments. My supervisor was not actively involved in my research and he did not amend or add to any chapters. He just provided broad advice on the contents of each chapter so that I can fulfil the requirements of my degree.
In this case, should I credit him as a joint author in any paper I may publish from my dissertation? I cannot see a case for joint copyright of my work!<issue_comment>username_1: I think this kinds of discussions boil down to if a person has had a significant impact on the paper. This can be in either of the following categories:
* conception and design of the project
* data collection
* data analysis and conclusions
* manuscript preparation
These are the categories in the quantitative uniform authorship declaration (QUAD) system (Verhagen JV, Wallace KJ, Collins SC, Scott TR (2003) *QUAD system offers fair shares to all authors*. Nature 426: 602., or [this link](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1299064/) for some information). THe QUAD system quantifies what each author has contributed to. Ofcourse, where you put the line when someone is a co-author or not is debatable.
If your supervisor does not tick a lot of boxes, you could put him in the acknowledgements of your papers. Alternatively, if you feel his contribution is significant in either of the above categories, or more than one, add him as an author.
In addition, co-authorships come reasonably cheap. You have collaborated on your project, and you make your supervisor happy with an additional publication. Also, your supervisor is probably more well known in your field of study. If he associates himself with this paper that might mean more attention for your paper, although how valid this point is depends on the reputation of your supervisor.
In regard to copyright, often you sign the copyright of your paper over to the publisher of the paper. Maybe you do not mean copyright, but attribution. You did the work, and adding him as a co-author makes it look like you did not do it alone. If you feel like this, it looks like you feel his contribution has not been significant enough to make him co-author.
A lot of things to consider.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: From your description it sounds like your supervisor was acting as a supervisor, not as a collaborator; however without knowing the exact details of his contributions, and what the etiquette/standards of your field are, it would be impossible for us to assess whether or not he should be a co-author. Why not just ask him?
Also, keep in mind that in certain fields it may look bad if your post-PhD publications are all joint with your supervisor - people sometimes assume that means the supervisor did all the work, or question your ability to perform independent research. For this reason, even if his contributions to your work were substantial, your supervisor may prefer to forgo being a co-authour to help your career. Best is to just ask.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll assume that you have a good relationship to your PhD advisor and that you can have a reasonable discussion with him. If this is not the case, then ignore the following as you will potentially have much bigger things to worry about.
It sounds as if the papers have not been written yet, so I'd suggest you discuss this with him as soon as possible. Lay out to him which papers you want to write, what will be in them, and where you plan to submit them, and ask him if he would like to be a co-author on any of them.
Now, the important thing is that this co-authorship you're offering is *not a free ride*. I would assume that a good supervisor knows that this will imply a significant contribution to the preparation of the manuscript and/or any follow-up work that still needs to be done. If he is willing to *actively* contribute to the papers, then you have a *bona fide* co-author and nothing to worry about.
If your supervisor is not willing to contribute anything to your publications, then there is no reason to add him as a co-author.
In any case, you should be open and honest about your intentions. Your supervisor is a very important person in the critical post-PhD phase of your academic career, and even if you leave academia, he is your previous employer. In any case, he will be writing all your letters of recommendation, so don't do anything that may have a negative influence on your relationship.
**In summary**: Ask him first, and if necessary, remind him that co-authorship implies active collaboration. If he does actively collaborate, you have a good and valuable co-author, and if he does not, he will either not want co-authorship, or you will have a valid reason not to add him.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I know this is quite old, but I am providing an answer as I have experienced something similar recently. Given your description, it looks like you have done the majority (>90%) of the work and, as such, I see no reason why you should even bother with asking your supervisor if they like to be a co-author.
I strongly disagree with username_3's suggestion, as if you do ask them, they're unlikely to say no (who DOESN'T want to be a co-author on a paper?). And if they say yes, then you have no guarantee that they will do the amount of work necessary for said authorship. In fact, and from my experience, listing someone as a co-author *in the hope* that they will, along the way, contribute in a way that makes them deserving of that authorship is counterproductive and poor project management. As you said, you've already done the majority of the work - what makes you think that someone who wasn't actively involved in the research will do a good job writing the paper?
PhD students vary. Some of us are self-motivated and know what we're doing and thus require next to no-input from supervisors. Others are not so fortunate and require significant input from supervisors. I see no reason why supervisors should be included as co-authors in the case of the former. Hope it's all sorted now.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/11 | 809 | 3,531 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been invited to write a book chapter in an edited volume, relating to my field of work. I have a paper ready that I have not published and was planning to submit it soon. So, I am wondering is it worth to use that article for the book chapter, as both are on the same topic, or is it in a sense a waste of a journal paper, as book chapters might not be seen to have the same academic value? What should I do? Should I, instead, send the ready paper to a journal for a review and write a book chapter, based on a couple papers I have published, for instance?
Generally speaking, where does a book chapter stand? Is it something between a conference paper and a full-fledged journal article? Or, does does it have the same value as either of the above-mentioned publication types, in your opinion?<issue_comment>username_1: Like a lot of things in academia, I think this will heavily depend on what discipline you're in. In computer science for example, while there's nothing wrong with a book chapter, a paper at a conference or in a journal is typically more valuable.
The reason normally given is that papers are peer reviewed (as compared to edited), so they are somehow more 'valid'.
Having said that, there's always myriad exceptions. Writing a whole book that everyone uses is much better than a few papers. Later in the career, book chapters perhaps gain value as they're a mark of respect and prestige (once you've already proven your research ability).
As a counter-point though, from my limited experience, it seems that book chapters are much more common in bioinformatics and operations research, and thus are viewed more highly.
Talk to fellow academics in your area, their opinion will be the best guide.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my field a peer reviewed article counts for a lot more than a chapter in an edited book. That said, a published chapter in an edited book counts a lot more for job searches than a working/submitted/under review/under revision manuscript. Often edited books lead to a publication in press much quicker than a journal. I would definitely look into the time scale of the book chapter.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It may depend on the book. If the other chapters are being authored by big shots, then their prestige could rub off. On the other hand, if the other chapters are authored by less well-known people, then it might not be seen as that great. Another thing to consider: your university or department might weight impact factors in their assessment of your research quality, which means publishing in a good journal will be of the most benefit. In the end, the strength of the article itself will say a lot, independent of the publishing venue. If it becomes a classic in the field with lots of citations, then that's pretty good, no matter what.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It's based of field but the general rule is to pump articles because they are peer reviewed. However some publishers have a review process so if the chapter is in a handbook or in a collection that will be important to the field then you're good. Look at publisher rankings and try to only publish chapters under top ranked book publishers. If you're a junior tenure track then ask colleagues and dean for tenure and promotion info. I will say that in the humanities or social sciences you are more likely to have your chapter cited by another person in their work than an article. Hope some of this helps.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/11 | 1,231 | 5,260 | <issue_start>username_0: My course require students to take 2 mid-term exams and one final exam. What should I do if some students didn't attend the first mid-term exam or the second one. Should I mark them Zero or repeat the exam for them? What is the best strategy in this regard?
**Update:** Although I gave them instructions from the beginning of the course. Some of them said that they were absent when I gave those instructions. Some of them said that they were sick and some said that they had an appointment with a dentist at same time of the exam, for example!<issue_comment>username_1: I would argue for consistency and responsibility.
You need to be consistent on how you apply the rule (i.e. what you told your students about missing exams at the beginning of the semester).
It is the responsibility of students to ensure they meet the requirements of the course (in order to obtain a satisfactory outcome). If there are any adverse circumstances, they need to be able to give you evidence (e.g. doctor's certificate).
Do remember, though, that we are all humans. A good teacher is also one who understands! (You hold the power in this case.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I will talk from my own experience:
* Being absent in the first class, is by no means a good excuse, back in my student days (before ubiquitous email information and professor's webpages) if you missed the first class, you would at least ask the sensible question of when the hell the midterm exam is.
* As a student, their prime responsibility is to, well.. study! And while I understand that some of them would have conflicting issues if they have to work (which are usually solved if you have a nice enough boss), other scheduling issues like an appointment with the dentist (that can be done any other day) are also not a valid excuse.
* Being a teacher of a 50+ student class, has a high likelihood that at least one of them may be sick the day of the exam, in those cases (hell, I've had teachers that were sick on the mid term's day), I agree that there should be some kind of Doctor's certificate around.
If you think the absence is somewhat justified, you can always make them retake the exam.
In my school, most teachers would make the student do this over finals.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: If the instructions were only given orally, and *not recorded* in written form that is globally accessible (either in a printed syllabus, or an online forum), then you don't have documentary evidence of the instructions being given.
If this is the case, I would follow the standard university procedures, if there are some available, governing this situation. If there are none, then *For this offering only*, and only in the case where no printed instructions were given, I would allow students to take a make-up exam.
On the other hand, if there is documented evidence of your policy, then you should follow the policy as it's given.
In any case, however, it's always a good idea to allow "documented" reasons (for example, illness, court appearances, schedule conflicts if exams are scheduled outside of regular time slots) to be excused, with a clear policy for what will happen (students can take a makeup exam; other grades are reweighted).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Depending on the reason they weren't present at the tests, i would take the decision of giving them a Zero unless they provide a plausible reason on why did they end up missing those tests, and apply common reasoning. If they were sick or somewhat binded by "higher forces", you can lend them a hand, but if they missed because of something else (even a doctor's appointment) and did not justify themselves BEFORE the date was due, a Zero it is. You might be their teacher, but you have to tell them to be open about things and be able to **ASK YOU** if they need help on something.
As someone already said, you are not at fault for them not showing to your first class (Sylabus class), and they could simply "ask around" for information about your class (at least ask you about some guidelines). Take it like an employee: If someone misses a day of work, they must bring themselves "up to speed" on whatever happened on that missing day, and cannot abide by the "i wasn't here" to cover their asses. University courses should not be considered an exception (you can consider that for students, their courses should be like having a job, and adjust accordingly to those responsabilities).
Now, if you gave sufficient notice on which dates your tests would be done, and they have the means to contact you and let you know of any problems they might have, then there is no excuse for them to miss your tests.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: If the information regarding the exam was published, then fail them and if no other screw ups, allow for makeup on last day of class. Kidnaping and torture by evil Nuns may be excepted with video proof. Life is tough and it is very unforgiving and it is their job to grow up and become responsible, it is not your job to teach them responsibility. It is your job to impart knowledge. You are not doing your job by allowing them leniency, nit to mention it is unfair to the others.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/11 | 3,108 | 13,005 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a student who failed an exam I gave three months ago and was supposed to show up for a remediation exam this week. The date was announced long in advance, and the student neither showed (all the others did show up) nor warned me. Now, she is asking for a new exam date, saying she was absent due to “medical reasons”. She produced a certificate that she was seeing a doctor at the time, but nothing indicates that it was an urgent need (rather than, say, a scheduled appointment).
How would you handle such a case? I asked the administrative staff at my institution, and they told me to proceed as I saw fit. Should I ask a more specific justification? In what form?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience dealing with these types of things correctly takes more time and effort then letting them slide. Continue scheduling exam times for her until she takes the exam or the incomplete automatically converts to a fail. I would even reuse the last remediation exam instead of making a new exam. I would only schedule the exam at times that are convenient for me.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer your last question, *Should I ask a more specific justification?*, I think not.
If you do so, it may constitute a case of intrusion of privacy. She has the right to not tell you any details. And it does not matter what form the justification is. Besides, you might not be able to verify it.
If I were you, I would fail her. You did everything you could including announcement in advance and the administration allows to do so.
Also, you need to look at this issue from other student's perspective. It's *not* fair to them if you allow her more chances because she would have more time to prepare for the remediation exam than other students who already took it.
**Edit**
Everybody deserves a second chance. The first line of this question, *I have a student who failed at my exam three months ago*. I suspect that's why the remediation exam was there for.
In the OP's question, the student missed it without prior warning. She wants it back. It's ***her*** responsibility to convince the prof that she has good execuse for missing it. However, *nothing indicates that it was an urgent need* on her document. The prof wasn't convinced that she had a good reason. So, he asked the question, can he request for more info? He really shouldn't because of privacy concern. The burden is on the student's shoulder, not the prof's.
I would agree that in the general cases, the prof should not fail the student just because of his/her medical conditions. However, in the OP's question, it was a remediation exam already. IMO, one is enough. You missed it. Do you have a good reason? No?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If I understand correctly, your student had previous knowledge of her appointment, and I do agree that perhaps it was an appointment that was hard to get (some doctors or conditions may justify it).
I agree that you should not pry, and respect her privacy, and she is entitled not to tell you.
Now, that said, it seems as it was not a medical emergency, so she had full knowledge at least a day ahead of said appointment. If we were living in 1970/80s with no cellphones/email/sms, etc, she might have some justification on not notifying you. But we are not, she should have sent an email (out of sole courtesy for the time you already set apart so she does not fail).
If it were me, I would fail her, it gives 2 messages, you should do well on your first try and, if given a second chance, you cannot get really picky, it also teaches to respect other people's times. (Oh my, three lessons in one go, that is more of what she gets if you keep giving her chances)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I would allow rescheduling, but be sure to use a different exam.
As some other answers indicated, one probably does not want to get embroiled in the details of the student's medical situation, and it may be inappropriate, besides. (I think it would be illegal in the U.S. to ask for details beyond a general note from the doctor.) Thus, one simply cannot have the information to know whether missing the exam was frivolous or not.
With regard to communication, yes, in principle one imagines that the student would have been able to contact you *in advance* to explain that (s)he'd miss the exam. But, again, without prying, one cannot know.
Yes, the odds may be good that the situation is due to student negligence than medical emergencies... and we should hope so, in the larger scheme of things. But, since we cannot be sure, my choice would be to treat the situation as a medical emergency, whose details I will not know. *And* allow further exam retake.
As to whether allowing further exam retakes is fair to the students who've managed to do things on schedule... if there was a genuine medical emergency, we are attempting to compare incomparables. If not, my consolation is that, in my experience, students who miss exams due to their own negligence or disorganization similarly fail to "profit" by extra chances.
Thus, I take claims of medical/personal emergencies at face value, and do not restrict re-takes of exams.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: At the university where I teach, a student who fails to show up for a registered exam will be given a failing grade *unless* he or she presents a medical excuse. I suspect it works similar where you are (given the system you're describing).
In this case, I think your best bet is to offer an additional remediation exam, but also indicate that there is a time limit to the extensions she can take—if she has not passed the exam by the end of the semester, a "did not take" or failing grade is to be submitted instead, as appropriate.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: It seems you have the answer with regard to procedure. The question now is what you should do in terms of "fairness" or ethics.
Educators and students should approach the work from the same perspective - for the student to learn. Academics should not be punitive, nor should they be a race to the bottom between the "good kids" who do everything right and hand their work in on time and the "slackers" or "hot messes" who can't seem to get anything in on time (flanked by the excuse-makers who suffer heavily from the [Dunning-Kruger effect](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect)). The most pleasurable students to teach are those who truly care about the subject matter. Unfortunately, a lot of students forget this and are instead overwhelmed by the stress of grades, lack of structure, etc.
Your best bet is to have a frank discussion with the student. Is she currently in danger of failing the class? Is she a borderline case? Whatever you do, don't assume that she's being manipulative. Instead, tell her that you would like to reschedule, but you're concerned that this might happen again. Ask her how *she* thinks she's doing in the class and what she would like to have happen. From there, talk options. Does she have the option to just drop the class (at most places, faculty can get around deadlines rather easily)? What is her worst case scenario? Is she prepared for the final? She should have the option to take the exam, but it might be a good opportunity to talk about actions she can take to prevent this sort of thing from happening in the future. Talk about learning from failure and taking measures to prevent this in the future. It's possible she's a pathological liar, but it's also possible that she's a kid who needs more guidance navigating the adult world.
No matter what, you ought to give her a chance to take the exam again and open communication about her status in your class. Invite her to your office hours to talk and tell her to email you back if she can't make it. If she fails to respond, then you have to fail her, but making sure that it's an emotionally neutral experience is probably your best bet.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_7: I've had friends in this situation -- the thing about medical problems is that some of them are quite chronic (and thus, what happened before could happen again), as opposed to the one-time medical emergency that the system seems designed for.
Compound this with the hardness of getting THAT doctor for THAT date to prevent medications from running out or to avoid being dropped by that doctor, and even a prescheduled appointment becomes a non-neogitable enterprise (although if that were the case, I'd think she could have warned you!)
Let her retest, but I see no need to redo the exam unless you have reason to believe she is using this as a way to cheat or otherwise buy time.
If she does it again, well... you can keep retesting, but I've known professors that failed someone for less. At that point I think it's more a case of whether you like this student enough not to autofail her for something unrelated to the actual material.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: When I was in this situation, I just allowed the student to reschedule, but that the exam format would change to an [oral exam](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_exam).
I've found (after a bit of practice) that oral exams are a great way of deciding grades or making pass/fail decisions. I even started to use them in my regular assessments.
The content of the oral exam should be based on the remediation exam that the student missed, but can be more free-ranging in terms of what extra questions you can ask.
I also suggest allowing the student to have a companion present in the exam room. The companion can be there, but cannot speak (unless asked by you). Many students get freaked out by oral exams if they haven't done them before, so allowing a trusted companion to be there often (somewhat) alleviates their stress.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: While the involved doctor most certainly is not allowed to tell you *why* she was there, I wouldn't be too surprised if they (or their receptionist) might confirm *if* the appointment was made long ago or not. That will of course not protect you from them being somehow related to your student and lie, but it's hopefully unlikely.
**edit** As mentioned in the comments, the doctor/receptionist is not obliged to provide any information and may refuse to do so for their own sake. You could ask your student for a prove *if* she claims it was not planned long ago, but then again, **in dubio pro reo**.
You could ask her to either wait until the next year's exam (if possible), or invite her to an oral exam quite soon - after all, the visit to the doctor is supposed to have been spontaneous, so she should be prepared enough to manage that while you can infer whether the student was trying to gain time or not.
And while it would suck to later learn she lied, it would suck even more if you turned out to be wrong. She'll have enough other exams to prove her honesty, I suspect.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: In my school, redo exams have a maximum grade of the minimum grade to pass. The idea is that if a student can't pass the first time, they best they can do is 'just pass' and not more. For medical reasons, maybe consider the first redo an actual first attempt. However, the latest seems like a bit more than reasonable (someone that sick should stop attending classes and focus on her health).
So, I would give her another exam but her maximum grade would be the minimum passing grade.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: This student has already had three opportunities to get a better outcome:
1. She could have learned the material and passed the original exam.
2. She could have shown up for the remediation exam.
3. She could have contacted the instructor in a timely manner about the doctor's appointment.
She blew all three opportunities. There is no need for further hand-holding. The appropriate response is to let her grade on the original exam stand. Any other response is unfair to the other students, who played by the rules.
Speculation about the difficulty of scheduling a doctor's appointment at a particular time is beside the point. She still could have contacted the instructor in a timely manner.
Speculation that it could have been an emergency is beside the point. She hasn't asserted that it was an emergency.
Concerns about her medical privacy are beside the point. For example, if it was a life-threatening situation or an unforseeable situation, then she could have asserted that without volunteering the details. She didn't.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: She's had plenty of opportunities to study and prepare for the exam. My response would be something like "Have a seat and take the exam now." There's no reason for you to be at all flexible about rescheduling and no excuse that the student can have for not immediately taking the exam. Having the student take (and most likely fail) the exam would settle the issue once and for all.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/11 | 1,281 | 5,360 | <issue_start>username_0: Often I've come across rules of thumb about maintaining active publication record. The advice I've most often been given is that one should have at least two papers under review at all times? What's your strategy? I am in the social sciences.<issue_comment>username_1: As many as you possibly can (as long as they are quality submissions).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Saying you should always have *N* papers under review is foolish. Say *N* = 2. You've just submitted a paper, and then a few days later, the other paper comes back from review with an acceptance notice well ahead of schedule (in two months instead of four). Does that mean you have to submit another one immediately, in order to have two in the pipeline? That doesn't make sense to me, as it makes your work subject to arbitrary deadlines that are orthogonal to producing high-quality publications.
You should keep a general track of how the work in your group (or your own work, if you report to someone else). You should also keep track of the general expectations of someone *at your current career stage*, and make sure that your publication output is consistent with your peers. (Don't worry about exact agreement: producing 80 or 90% of the total output is not really a big deal; producing 25 to 50% is likely to be an issue.)
Beyond that, however, you should focus on making sure your publications have quality, with a much lesser emphasis on quantity. One *Nature* or *Physical Review Letters* (or equivalent journal in your chosen field) article is probably worth a lot more than two or three publications in other journals.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **You're simply asking the wrong question.** Your goal should be to do the **best** work you can, not the **most** — quality, not quantity. One revolutionary paper is worth far more than dozens of incremental papers that nobody reads.
To put it another way, if you find yourself submitting so many papers that you're worried about being overwhelmed, you're doing something wrong. Aim higher. Publish fewer, bigger chunks of work. Spend less time writing and more time thinking and digging. Stop just writing papers and develop a research program. The CV bullets will take care of themselves.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: I somewhat agrees with username_3, but on the other hand it's not like one can just decide to write a ground breaking paper.
Having a steady stream of visible work is something positive to get a job, and one should neither publish dozen of small papers nor stall on a very important problem he cannot solve.
One way to get a good balance is to aim for a given stream of papers : if you get them easily, then try harder problem, if you don't, then maybe you should try something more manageable. Of course, what you aim at is very dependent of your field (and even sub-field).
I am in fundamental mathematics and personally like to have, at any given time, at least one paper under review, one paper that mostly needs writing, one idea to develop that could make a paper. In that way, I can focus each (non-absorbed-by-other-task-than-research-)day on what I feel like: writing, reading to back up the idea, do the needed computations, etc. Moreover, having a submitted paper makes me feel more comfortable trying things that take time but have a good chance to fail.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: username_3's answer is excellent, and probably the most "correct". Nevertheless, as food for thought I offer the following anecdote from Bayles and Orland's *Art and Fear*:
>
> The ceramics teacher announced on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups. All those on the left side of the studio, he said, would be graded solely on the quantity of work they produced, all those on the right solely on its quality. His procedure was simple: on the final day of class he would bring in his bathroom scales and weigh the work of the "quantity" group: fifty pound of pots rated an "A", forty pounds a "B", and so on. Those being graded on "quality", however, needed to produce only one pot - albeit a perfect one - to get an "A".
>
>
> Well, came grading time and a curious fact emerged: the works of highest quality were all produced by the group being graded for quantity. It seems that while the "quantity" group was busily churning out piles of work - and learning from their mistakes - the "quality" group had sat theorizing about perfection, and in the end had little more to show for their efforts than grandiose theories and a pile of dead clay.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: The advice I've been given for cognitive neuroscience is to (1) make sure I have at least one publication every year, (2) invest the rest of my time in high quality work.
The reasoning is that a full year's publication gap in your CV looks bad, but on the other hand, what people mostly look at when you apply for jobs is where you published the handful of your best papers. One or two high-impact publications are more likely to impress people than ten low-impact ones, but a publication gap looks bad regardless of where your best work got published. How many papers you should have under review at any given moment to fulfill this goal will depend you your research area and the duration of the review process.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/11 | 820 | 3,403 | <issue_start>username_0: The French [*classes prépas*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_preparatoire_aux_grandes_ecoles) system includes, during the first two years of undergraduate (post-baccalaureate) education, a series of regular oral exams, known as *colles*. Basically: every week during your first two years, you have two oral exams, each lasting one hour, with one teacher examining two or three students, each using a blackboard. A science student would typically have math and chemistry on week A, then physics and another topic (engineering, foreign language, …) on week B. This system prepares students for national competitive exams after their second year, which includes both written and oral components.
Now, whenever I have to explain that system to a foreign colleague, I have to do it from the start (as above) because I do not know any other similar system they might know (especially, I don't know of any equivalent or similar system in the US). Is there one?<issue_comment>username_1: The correct answer to this question is either *yes* or *no*. To answer *yes* one would simply need to provide a single example of another country with an oral exam system similar to the French system. To answer *no* we would need confirmation that no other country uses a similar system. To start the alphabetical list:
* United Kingdom: Undergraduate students at the top universities tend to begin their studies immediately following their A-Level examinations which do not have a substantial oral component.
* United States of America: Undergraduate students at the top universities tend to begin their studies immediately following their high school/secondary education. Admission is based upon performance throughout high school and standardize test neither of which have a substantial oral component.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm from Serbia and study at the Faculty of Philosophy. Almost all exams are oral, except for some that require you write a paper on a topic of your choice. We also have a few courses that require tests, that you have to pass so you can take an oral exam. This system is used for all humanities studies and other social studies as far as I am aware of.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: There may be oral exams in others country but as far as I know there is nothing like "colles", colles aren't "exams", they are trainings for the oral part of a national competition.
The reason is simple: the classe prépa / Grande Ecole system is unique to france. The main reason to go to "classe prépa" is not to learn but to go to the best "grande ecole".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: This is the same system in Russia and it’s the standard. Although not once every two weeks as you describe. They are more like end of semester exams. Usually students will be given a list of 30 questions on the subject. Let’s say it’s chemistry.
The students will have to know how to answer all these questions, as 2 will be asked at random by the professor on exam day. Students should talk for about 5 minutes for each question. So actually the professors have the longer working day going through all the students. And students come in for their 10 minute slot. I believe this system is only in universities.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: In Italy almost all exams are oral. We get used to it since elementary school.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/12 | 649 | 2,550 | <issue_start>username_0: I have an MSc degree and I work at university as a lecturer. However, the university has a policy where you should do your PhD within a given time frame. The problem is that I'm not interested in any area yet, nor am I interested in doing the work associated with a PhD.
Should I just go with it because the university forces me to do it, or should I just quit from the university and look for another job?
What do you think? Can I succeed if I start doing my PhD while i feel that I'm forced to do it?<issue_comment>username_1: In my university back in Mexico, they had something similar, if professors want to get ahead (income, professional, etc) they had to an additional degree (Masters, PhD)
I think that if you do not have the motivation, you'll have a lot of problems, doing a PhD is already a taxing endeavor, in the sense that many times you'll start wondering wether this was a good idea or not.
As in many things in life, if you do this because you are made to (like students that go to college because their parents want to) you'll have lots of resentment.
However, not all is lost, you can try looking for something you are really passionate about, and then try to do a PhD on that.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A PhD has the potential to open many doors. Its better to do it when there is some motivation than regret later. Think six years from now and where you want to be and whether it would require a PhD.
Do note that it is not easy. It requires hardwork and dedication. There would be many times when you would want to quit. So have a strong reason to pull you through when this happens.
Most importantly, in my view you would be better placed in whatever field you choose with a PhD. You may be afraid of sacrificing three years of your life now but what about the rest of the years ahead. As the say, time flies. Only you can make the call.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Above all, a PhD is about learning how to become a researcher. You mention that you have a lecturer position, does it include doing research? If you want to become a researcher in addition to teaching, a PhD is the way to go. If performing research is what you want, doing a PhD is logical, and should be worth it. If you have no ambition in being a researcher, a PhD is going to be a very painful process, similar to doing any other job you do not enjoy.
In the end, it is all about what you want. If you want to be a reseacher, do a PhD. If not, I would not recommend it.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/11 | 2,106 | 8,697 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm not sure where to ask this so I thought I'd ask you here.
I'm in my 3rd year at university doing maths and some of the modules are a bit tricky. I know this and I know the way that I need to work in order to understand the material and pass the exams well. Due to this, I try and spend a lot of time learning the theory (and recently its been through loads of questions on here). However, what I noticed with some of my friends is that they don't put in the same amount of effort as me (quality wise).
Let's take the example on [semidirect products](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semidirect_product). A lot of us have been struggling with constructing SDP's, however I've tried very hard to learn the theory on them and what the answer's are looking for and what the methods I need to do (and why I'm doing them) to try and learn how to construct them. A lot of that has been on [Math.SE](http://mathematics.stackexchange.com) but I've been referring to online PDF's and lecture notes as well. Now, my friends know that I put this in and try and learn it and so I can do the work properly, so I think they're trying to take advantage of that.
Today I showed one person how to do a question regarding compositions on [Möbius transforms](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%B6bius_transformation) and they just refused to think for themselves. I said "think about it, because I'm not going to tell you what the answer is" and they still wouldn't think (just kept saying "I don't know"), so I didn't tell them the answer. Eventually, after some BIG hints, they got what to do. Now I've noticed people are relying on me to tell them how to construct SDP's (as this is a main question in the exam). From my history, you can see that I've struggled a lot with this and I think I'm close to solving this problem now, but at the same time I can tell that my friends aren't going to learn it themselves. Mentally they've given up and so won't even bother learning it.
My question is this: **Should I tell them the answer, when (it is when and not if because I WILL get it!) I figure out how to do it?**
I feel bad because obviously I don't want to lie and say "I don't know how to do it" or mess up their exam, but at the same time, I feel like they had the exact same time as me to do this, and the same resources (online, books, notes, ask the lecturer, etc.) yet they still didn't do it. So it's their own fault. Plus, the time it'd take me to teach and explain it to them, I could spend that couple of hours doing my own work. Other examples, revise another module, etc.
What should I do? Do you academics have any tips?
I'm sure you feel like this sometimes when people ask questions on here clearly without thinking about and just expect you to answer it.<issue_comment>username_1: I've run into this situation far too many times. You're right to be frustrated, and you shouldn't have to devote your precious time to endeavors that bring you no benefit.
Be honest and say something like "I'd really like to help you, but I just don't have the time. If you'd like, I can share with you the resources that helped me understand it, but I have enough on my plate already."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If you have found certain resources useful in your quest to teach yourself then create a zip file containing the most useful to pass out to anyone who asks you for help. This is YOUR qualification and if you feel that you need to spend more time on your own studies in order to get the grade you deserve then don't waste that time spoon feeding others that are unlikely to be a part of your life 2 days after graduation.
Your facility should have some form of online discussion forum so if you really feel responsible for the outcome of your cohorts exam then create a potted version of your findings on there so that everyone can benefit and you can just direct any people with further queries there - the added bonus to this is that your tutor may well add some clarification to what you write so if you have misunderstood something you also gain from doing this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I do agree partially with username_1, when he says that you can feel frustrated and you shouldn't feel forced to answer every question for them.
Although, I've noticed to be able to explain something, you need to understand them quite well. Even some times, you are forced to attack a problem from different point of views depending on who asks, since the same explanation won't be convincing to everyone. By doing so, you might make a new link between different part of the material, and increase your own understanding. In my experience, helping other students has almost always a net benefice and is a really good way to improve yourself.
Also, as you continue, having only the answer will not get you much further and especially in math where concepts build upon each others, you will have a net advantage over all the others.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In my experience, undergraduate students are a lot like children. They will be as lazy as you allow them to be. They will resist learning. They will resist doing the work and putting in the time. It's human nature...and it is something we, as teachers, must get the students to change.
Were I in your shoes, I would make it clear how to do something (as any teacher should) but I would certainly NOT do the work for them. If they keep saying "I don't know" then you should tell them "It's OK. Not everybody gets it their first time. Perhaps you get it when you take this class for a second time." I usually see my students' eyes open a bit on this one as they see that you are being so compassionate and understanding while still being refused to be manipulated. They also get the clear understanding that they will fail if they don't do the work.
We need to help students. That includes helping them to not be so lazy.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I suggest repressing the natural urge of "*They don't deserve this, I put in the work. They didn't, I deserve this.*" as while it may feel good, it won't get you anywhere. You might like to keep enjoying the fact that you have shown you are a hard working independent learner, to feel satisfaction (that you deserve).
Look at if from a Advantages and Costs of teaching
**Advantages:**
* Teaching is a fantastic way to cement your knowledge. (Many say it is the best way.)
* This gains you friends, or at least positive acquaintances. These people become your colleges, and industry contacts once you graduate.
* Gaining a reputation as a self-less helpful person, can open up doors to you.
* Teaching is a valuable life skill, that will help you rise through your chosen career
* Improving the quality and reputation of your institution. Obviously this is only a small step, but a journey of a thousand miles begins that way. If it becomes known that "Graduates from X, really know there stuff." then you have increased the value of your degree, wrt getting jobs etc.
**Costs:**
* Time (this is a big one)
* Boredom, repeating stuff over an over, one you have completely got it, gets you no where.
* Grade Scaling: If your university scales the final grade, so that only your position relative to class average matters, letting other people fail will improve your score (by driving the average down). However you really have to cripple someone (or many people) especially in larger classes, to see any really benefit. It's a pretty cold strategy.
**Actions:**
Look at the costs vs benefits, and be honest with your fellows, if it is not to your benefit to help them .
* if you don't have time, tell them (that you don't have time).
* If you have got bord, tell them you can't keep going over the same stuff, you've move on the other things.
* If you are a harsh enough person to be motivated by Grade Scaling, tell them "We're in direct competition, helping you is only hindering myself."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Students who don't put much effort in, do so usually because the material does not interest them. If you can make the material interesting enough to get them excited about it, they will begin to put in more effort.
And to answer your question, should you tell them the answer? In most cases, no, you should not. No one learns by being told the answer. People only learn by coming to an answer using their own mind.
On the other hand, if YOU don't know the answer, then you should first find the answer yourself, and THEN still don't tell them the answer but use the fact you now know the answer to help them reach the same conclusion (without telling them the answer).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/13 | 848 | 3,399 | <issue_start>username_0: As a PhD student in CS I will have advancement to candidacy soon.
I am looking for information which helps me on the advancement exam.
Particularly:
1. What does a committee expecting to hear from me?
2. What should I focus on during me presentation: should I tell them about work I have done or what I am planning to do?
3. If I need tell them what I am planning to do, then how to do that? I mean, research is vague, there is no clear guidance, and you don't know what will be in the end.
Any comments that help better understand what to expect and how to prepare are very welcome!<issue_comment>username_1: ***Ask your advisor and the program coordinator***. Usually, each institute has a guide for the candidacy exam. The guide lists some general requirements and the method of examining. The answers to your questions depends upon your department regulations and policies.
>
> What does a committee expecting to hear from me?
>
>
>
They expect you to be expert in your field and answer their tough questions. Also, they expect you to agree with their opinions and not try to be too smart.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The only goal of the candidacy/qualifying/preliminary exam is to convince the committee that you deserve to pass the candidacy/qualifying/preliminary exam. The passing criteria differ, sometimes radically, from one university to the next, from department to the next, from one research area to the next, and even from one committee member to the next. It's the academic equivalent of Calvinball, only you don't get to make up the rules. [Do not question the mask.](http://www.picpak.net/calvin/oldsite/images/roz3.jpg)
The ***only*** way to determine how to prepare for the candidacy/qualifying/preliminary exam is to **ask your committee members directly**. Individually. In person. I *strongly* recommend scheduling a one-on-one meeting with each committee member at least a month in advance of the actual exam.
Same goes for the [thesis defense](http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/faq-the-snake-fight-portion-of-your-thesis-defense).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Have a solid research proposal and present it well. There is no other way to convince your assessors.
In my case, I had to do a public presentation with the assessors sitting in the audience. It was not an easy exercise but I took on the challenge head-on (really, there was no other option). And I prepared, prepared and prepared.
I asked my supervisor what the likely questions would be and how can I make my proposal better. I attended presentations by other students and studied the vibes.
Just be aware that not everything always goes to plan. I had chosen a concept that was highly contested in the literature so had several question on how I would handle it. (One of my assessors was an expert in that area!)
Most importantly, show a willingness to learn. If you cannot answer a question, be honest about it. Say something like "Thats an interesting angle and I will certainly take your comments on board". And mean it. Be honest and polite.
Confirmation of candidature is to show you are ready to do advanced research. Your assessors would most likely overlook a few flaws in your proposal (no research is perfect) but may not
be that generous if they realise you are not ready. Believe me, they are amazingly quick at the latter.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/13 | 424 | 1,702 | <issue_start>username_0: (This is a junior researcher's question.)
Scientific publications contain a part discussing related work and the context of the paper. However, it is not clear where to put the section discussing related work of a paper.
**Where does the section on related work belong in a scientific publication? Is there any universal standard, or is it arbitrary?**<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, put it in the introduction. This partly motivates further study of the field, i.e., by showing that previous experts have worked on similar problems,
and that such problems are well established.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Like so many times, it depends on the field. The options in general are either at the beginning, after the intro; or at the end, before the conclusions.
Look at previous issues of the journal/conf you are targeting.
Also, ask your advisor.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you're writing a conference paper, put it in the same place as it appears in the conference papers you read. If you're not reading any conference papers, you're not ready to write one.
If you're writing a journal paper, put it in the same place as it appears in the journal papers you read. If you're not reading any journal papers, you're not ready to write one.
If you're writing a dissertation, put it in the same place as it appears in the dissertations you read. If you're not reading any dissertations, you're not ready to write one.
If you're writing a `$PAPER_TYPE`, put it in the same place as it appears in the `$PAPER_TYPE`s that you read. If you're not reading any `$PAPER_TYPE`s, you're not ready to write one.
Also: **Ask your advisor.**
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/01/13 | 545 | 2,420 | <issue_start>username_0: There are a few reference citing formats around but I'd like to know what's the relevant information to put in a reference in general. If I want to cite a book, what should go in the reference other than the title which is obvious, same for other media? By formatting I mean content, punctuation, font, size, typography, etc...
My second question is: do references undergo any modifications when the medium in which they are referenced changes (paper, article, tutorial, etc...).<issue_comment>username_1: Formatting and desired content depend mostly on the publication venue. Most journals have a citation style, and will often provide a style file for the bibliography manager that you use. So it depends on what venue you have in mind.
If you don't have a venue in mind, then you can use any standard format that's used in your area of study.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Every publication type has some specific metadata that should be given in any citation.
For a book, these would be:
* Authors or editors for an edited book
* Title
* Year of publication
* Information on the publisher (mostly name and address)
For a journal article, you should include:
* Authors
* Title of the article
* Title of the journal
* Volume of the journal
* Page numbers or article identification number for journals without page numbers.
Generally, looking at the required fields for a bibtex entry may give you an idea of what are the required pieces of information for any publication type.
Note that some journals don't generally include the title for journal citations, but I find that inconvenient for the reader. There may by additional information depending on the citation style, for example the issue number for citing journal articles, URLs, ISBN/ISSN. But these additional pieces of information, the formatting and even the ordering of the information in the reference generally depend on publication venue, as username_1 wrote in his answer. The key information however should be the same for each citations style.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Check out the [IEEE citation reference](http://www.ieee.org/documents/ieeecitationref.pdf) [PDF] for an example of how the IEEE (Institution of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) does its citations for different media.
They definitely change what information appears, depending on the medium.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/13 | 262 | 1,094 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing a peer review exercise and I am not sure when referring to specific parts of the paper whether it is better to quote or paraphrase them. What is the correct protocol on such this?
The review decides whether the paper gets published in a small magazine, whether that makes any difference to these things, I am not sure.<issue_comment>username_1: For a review it doesn't matter that much, but it's safer to quote, so that there's no chance of misinterpretation.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends why you are quoting/paraphrasing.
Usually I structure my review in two parts. The first part summarizes the paper, the major contributions, and the high-level strengths and weaknesses of the submission. In this part I paraphrase. This shows the authors, and the editor, that I have read and understood the paper well enough to describe its ideas in my own words.
In the second part I get into the details, i.e. you forgot citation X, formula Y has an error, these sentences are confusing, etc. In this part I quote.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/01/13 | 753 | 3,291 | <issue_start>username_0: About a week ago, I went to submit the application for the mathematics PhD program at one of my top choice schools. The form told me I had missed the deadline, which was December 15th. I had January 5th written down on my list of application information, but when I looked it was indeed Dec. 15 on the department website.
I distinctly remembered seeing Jan. 5th, however, so I looked it up again and found the website for general graduate admissions where I found the deadline to begin with. It said/says January 5th, and is even program specific (under the "PhD in Mathematics"). So I emailed my application to the mathematics department graduate admissions email address explaining there was an incorrect deadline on another part of the website, provided a link, and requested that I still be considered.
I should note that this is a big school which will probably get a lot of applications, so hopefully they haven't gotten far through review yet. Also, everything except my personal statement was on the website before the Dec 15 deadline, but of course the submit button was not hit so I don't know if this helps.
I haven't heard back from them aside from an automated "we'll get to this eventually" email, and it has been about 7 days now. I think I have a strong application for this school in particular and really don't want to lose my chance to apply. What do I do? Should I try to call the math department? Submit it to a different email? Or am I just boned?
**Update:** I called the department's admissions office and was vigorously informed that they refuse to consider my application under any circumstances and that they "didn't care what my excuse was." The prof I was corresponding with talked to somebody and I guess they're going to fix that part of the website. Doesn't do me any good, but it's nice to know. I would up getting into (and completing) a PhD program somewhere else.<issue_comment>username_1: I would try and personally contact someone at the school, like @gerrit commented, call them. Try and explain your situation, and say that you hope you will still be considered for the program. Do mention that it was not that you simply forgot the deadline, but that an official document stated the wrong date and include this piece of evidence. Stress that you are very enthusiastic about the program, and that you would be disappointed if this communication error would prevent you from having a chance to enter the program.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Sorry to disappoint you but Dec 15 to Jan 5 is a long time in the graduate admissions process. We (in neuroscience) try to read and short list (hundreds of) applications within a week of the application deadline so that we can send out invitations for 2nd round interviews, which generally take place at the end of January.
It is pretty bad that they had conflicting information on their site. I think the "call them" advice is good. But it would be even better if one of your letter writers knows someone personally at that school and can intervene on your behalf.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I probably would have explained this to one of your recommendation letter writers to see if they could write to someone in the department.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/14 | 1,827 | 7,334 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a sixth form student, and one day I would like to call myself an academic.
Do you know of any academic journals that are specifically for students, or would accept work from a student? I would be very much interested to hear about an organisation that does this.
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: I have never heard of an academic journal specifically meant for high school students. There might be magazines directed towards publishing projects of high school students, but I would not call these academic journals.
In regard to publishing, in principle if you have something that is of sufficient level to be published, you could just submit the paper to any journal. It would then be reviewed. The major hurdle would probably be that you do not work for a reputable institute or university. You could try and remedy this problem by looking for a supervisor who already works at an institute/university who would be willing to collaborate with you.
That said, realistically I do not know many 3rd year **university** students who have the level to write good and relevant academic papers. So, it might be a little far fetched to write an academic paper in high school. Than again, if you feel that your contribution is worthwhile, please feel free to ignore this advice.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Publishing in early career
==========================
If the research is good enough, it **will** get published. The challenge is to do good-enough research as a sixth-form student. Actually, that's a challenge for any of us, at whatever stage we're at. The best example I know of, of young researchers getting published, is a paper in Biology Letters from [a class of 8-10 year olds](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12051883). The paper, [Blackawton Bees](http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2010/12/18/rsbl.2010.1056.full), is a good bit of research *and* an entertaining read.
>
> Principal finding ‘We discovered that bumble-bees can use a combination of colour and spatial relationships in deciding which colour of flower to forage from. We also discovered that science is cool and fun because you get to do stuff that no one has ever done before.
>
>
>
Actually, never mind the rest of this answer for now. If you're reading this, whoever you are, and you haven't read the paper before, [just go read it now](http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2010/12/18/rsbl.2010.1056.full) - it's free to view for all. You'll thank me (so remember to come back here afterwards ;-).
Journals for students
=====================
As far as journals specifically for students: well, they all are, really. Pretty much all of us who are reading them, are reading them for study. God knows, they're almost always so dryly written that no one would read them for pleasure.
There are exceptions. For easier reading, there's [New Scientist](http://www.newscientist.com/) and [Scientific American](http://www.scientificamerican.com/); though the science sometimes suffers in the cause of circulation-friendly journalism, particularly for New Scientist.
More digestible science
=======================
And there are quite a lot of science blogs on the web, which make for more digestible reading of recent research. Unfortunately, there's also a much higher number of **pseudo**-science blogs on the web, that, unless you know a lot about the subject, are hard to distinguish from real science, but contain pure unadulterated nonsense. For example, [Real Climate](http://www.realClimate.org/) is respectable science by respected scientists; *Watts Up With That* is unadulterated pseudo-science nonsense; but to the unwary, they are both climate science blogs. So, for finding new science blogs, **reader beware**. Even well-established science blogs sometimes go off the rails, when they stray outside their area of immediate expertise.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Specific answers depend on the field. There exist **conferences** that have special categories for students. For example, the **European Space Agency** offers logistical support for students' balloon and rockets experiments, and related conferences have dedicated categories for students of any level. Those conferences include proceedings, which means that it's possible to publish a proceedings paper. This is different from a peer-reviewed paper, and slightly less ambitious because it's not peer-reviewed; it is, however, checked for basic quality by the session convener.
An example of such a conference is the [ESA PAC Symposium](http://spaceflight.esa.int/pac-symposium2013/). As mentioned, this is a quite specific answer for a quite specific field. However, depending on the field you're interested in, perhaps such conferences exist for you too. You're best bet in this case would be to browse websites for relevant conferences and see if they have special student categories.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As the others have suggested, this is pretty field-specific. The IEEE organization has two publications aimed at college-level students:
* **[IEEE Potentials](http://www.ieee.org/membership_services/membership/students/potentials.html)**, a journal which discusses both research and careers. The articles are quite thorough and are written in the same form other IEEE journals, but assume less background.
* **[IEEE Spectrum](http://spectrum.ieee.org/magazine/)**, a publication which is a cross between a journal and a magazine. There are in-depth articles on engineering topics, but also more light discussions of fun side projects. I strongly recommend this for any high school student interested in engineering.
These are both geared towards engineering with a focus on electrical engineering, although other subdisciplines are covered as well. Again, I strongly recommend both of these for any undergraduate or advanced high school student interesting in engineering.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: What subject are you interested in? In mathematics I know of [College Mathematics Journal](http://www.maa.org/pubs/cmj.html) published by the MAA and despite its name, I think a good chunk of its material is accessible to high schoolers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I started one with that goal in mind back in high school (I'm in college now). Although it definitely cannot compare to fully funded, top tier journals, we strive to provide a learning experience. The journal is edited by 2 sets of people, professors and other students. The professors are there to help teach both the author and the student reviewer about the journal process, and provide his or her experience when it comes to publishing and academic work.
You can check it out: [The National High School Journal of Science](http://www.nhsjs.com)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Check out...
* The National High School Journal of Science <http://nhsjs.com>
* Journal of Emerging Investigators <https://www.emerginginvestigators.org>
* Journal of Experimental Secondary Science <http://jes2s.com>
* The Concord Review <http://www.tcr.org>
* Journal of Young Investigators <https://www.jyi.org>
* Journal of Student Research <http://jofsr.com>
See also...
* Berkeley Undergraduate Journal <https://buj.berkeley.edu>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/14 | 2,179 | 9,688 | <issue_start>username_0: I have received a manuscript to review for a journal. The interesting thing is, I had already reviewed this article (exact same title, abstract and author list, almost exact same content) for *another* journal a few weeks ago where I recommended that it be published, but only after major revisions of both form and content. When I first reviewed it, I wrote a two-page review, listing some questions and several “actionable” comments, ranging from some concerns about exactness of the text (some conclusions didn't seem fully backed by the results) all the way down to trivial stuff (grammar, a few typos, graphic issues with the figures, etc.).
Now, the manuscript has come to me for review again, but it is almost unchanged from the first version. None of the serious stuff has been addressed, and even most of the trivial stuff was not fixed (there's at least one remaining typo, and the figures still aren't fully legible). However, I think this behavior from the authors is clearly a bad signal, which should be somehow conveyed to the editor: they're not willing to amend their work, and would rather do some journal-shopping.
What would you suggest me to do? Should I just re-send my earlier review? Add a note to the editor about my knowledge of the “history” of the paper? Or maybe even include it in my review, so the authors are aware that people know of their behavior, and maybe feel bad enough to change their ways?
---
*PS: I wrote it in the present tense, but it's actually a story from my past. I'm not sure I did the right thing at the time, and I think it's better to actually formulate it as an open question…*<issue_comment>username_1: Personally, I would inform the editors of both journals. For the new editor, I would attach your earlier review, and recommend rejection.
Then it's up to the new editor to decide what to do in this situation. This falls in the category of ethical problems, and I think most journals recommend that reviewers contact the editor immediately in such a situation. Perhaps the journal has a policy for this, or the editor may discuss the matter with other editors or the chief editor.
Let me add why I find it unethical. Peer review relies upon the volunteer labour of anonymous reviewers. Reviewers may invest significant time, and do not really get anything in return. If authors of a manuscript completely ignore reviews, and instead submit an unchanged manuscript somewhere else, I would, as a reviewer, be quite annoyed. At the very least they could reply to the reviews, state point-by-point that they disagree, refuse to change anything and *then* submit it somewhere else; but completely ignoring is wasting peoples time.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I see nothing wrong with authors choosing to submit to a new journal instead of making changes suggested by reviewers, although not fixing typos just seems silly. I also think that if authors choose to go this route, they deserve to get a new batch of reviewers. While I like to think of myself as reasonable and impartial, I am happy to have authors confirm this by submitting someplace else. When I receive requests to review a manuscript that I have already reviewed, I turn the review down with a note to the AE that I have already reviewed the manuscript for another journal. I do not to say what journal or anything about my recommendation.
If for some reason I agree to review a manuscript and later find out that I have previously reviewed it, I would immediately contact the AE and explain what has happened. I would offer to provide a revised review. I would acknowledge in the review that I was reviewer *N* for the previous journal.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I was recently on the something like the other end of this: a paper I wrote was rejected with a number of comments and one major objection to the content. I made the small changes, but not the big one, and resubmitted to another journal. The new journal sent it back to the same referee.
The referee may well have felt I was engaged in journal shopping; in fact, in response to the report, I'd consulted with other people in the area, and gotten very positive feedback in support of the way the paper was written. I therefore thought it was reasonable to try again with a different journal, since there seemed to be genuine disagreement over the right approach.
The situation was handled quite well, and I'd recommend something like it to anyone on the other end: the editor was notified, and made the decision to ask for the report from the original referee, but also got a second opinion from a new referee.
In this case the story has a happy ending: the original referee didn't just resubmit a variant of the original report, but went above and beyond by explaining their main objection more clearly. The new explanation actually convinced me, where the old one hadn't, and I made the changes.
The moral being, the author *may* have actually taken the referee report seriously but honestly disagreed. That's not always the case, but in that situation you should consider the possibility---and that's why you definitely want to notify the editor, who should probably get a second opinion.
**added**: Just to be clear, I'm trying to address the general case of a referee in this situation, not just the particular instance that happened to username_4. There's a range of possible behavior by the paper author which could sound similar to what username_4 is describing, and which some future referee reading this question might be experiencing, from the case where the author has resubmitted a paper unchanged to the case where the authors have incorporated many minor suggestions and given careful consideration before not taking some more important ones. username_4 is describing a situation which sounds like it's closer to the first, I'm describing one which leans closer to the second.
A particular referee, in a particular case, may be able to judge which scenario is more likely, but *it doesn't matter* for the referee, because the correct answer is the same: notify the editor.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: I'll add here as an answer the course I did follow, so people can comment on it and help me see its pros and cons (obviously, I saw more pros than cons to it, as I did decide on it after some thought).
I went the last option mentioned in my question: I sent a review which consisted of my earlier review, with an added text clearly delimitated at the top explaining that I had already reviewed the paper for another journal (I didn't say which, as it seemed a breach of reviewer ethics). I also insisted that even uncontroversial changes hadn't been made, and I thought this shed bad light on the author's good faith participation in the peer-review process.
Finally, I watched later to see where the paper had been published: after being dropped from journal A to journal B (and maybe others), it ended up being published in a third, obscure journal with very few changes (but at least the typos were removed).
*As a side note: given that I was not such a big name in that particular subfield at the time, and the two editors who picked me for review didn't know me personally, I believe I was twice listed by the authors as “potential reviewer” upon submission of their work. Which means, either they didn't really think it through the second time, or they naturally assumed that the review they had received wasn't my type.*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Since you're being asked to review exactly the same object that you already reviewed, your task is simple: simply respond with exactly the same review. Your review is a function of the content. That function should produce the same value when applied to the same input. Just like when a browser is asked to load the same page twice, it can just fetch it from its cache (subject to expiry checks, which are clearly not applicable in this analogy).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: This situation has happened to me in both directions. As a reviewer, I always inform the editor first, and then only if they insist do I send them the earlier review. But I prefer to avoid it because otherwise it constitutes double jeopardy for the authors.
As an author, if I resubmit to a new journal, I expect to get a new set of opinions. There's no point in resubmitting if you're just going to get the identical comments. As to whether one should or should not revise a paper before resubmitting, that depends on many factors. Obviously factual errors or typos should be corrected. But I don't necessarily agree that one should go through a huge revision to address concerns raised by one set of reviewers, because a new set of reviewers may have a completely different set of issues, and maybe even object to some suggestions made by the first set of reviewers. Moreover, the second set, not knowing what issues were raised by the first set, won't know why certain things were included. For instance, if one reviewer asks me to add a paragraph favoring a particular interpretation (theirs of course) and I include this, but the paper is still rejected and I then send it to a new journal with a new reviewer, that person might completely disagree and reject the paper based on that interpretation which I only put in for the now-irrelevant reviewer in the first place!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Yes, resend your earlier review, just as verbatim as their MS. An explanatory note, no matter how diplomatically phrased, can be misconstrued / dismissed as you moaning and complaining, so I would not bother if I were you.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/14 | 1,485 | 6,214 | <issue_start>username_0: I completed my Masters' from Penn State University (US) last year in Industrial Engineering and I'm looking to enroll in a PhD. Here's the onion, I do not want to leave my full-time job to enroll in school full-time and complete the coursework requirment (as case with most US university), hence I was contemplating if there exists any PhD degree where coursework (or **on-campus presence**) is **not** required, either in US or Europe.
About research - I've already talked to my boss and he's quite okay with me performing research in-house (in company) for my PhD, better than that, he might even pay for it.<issue_comment>username_1: In Europe it is quite common to do a PhD without course requirements. You will generally have to have a Master's degree though, before you can start. This answer is about the situation in Europe (or at least, the Netherlands).
To do a PhD while working for a company can be possible, if you can find a professor that is willing to supervise you. It will be hard though if you are not in regular contact with the advisor. The most realistic option would be to do research on a joint project with academia and industry. I don't think though that this would be feasible if you work in the US, and the university is in Europe.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As Pieter says, at many European universities you can get through PhD without any coursework. That, however, is a different issue than not being present on campus.
### Coursework
In the past, in countries like German, it wasn't customary to complete coursework during PhD. The idea was that a PhD student was being trained by the supervisor and the pursuit of doctoral degree was meant as a true "assistantship". It is however changing in the recent years and more and more students are introducing graduation colleges, or other lecture programs aimed specifically at PhD students. So times are changing, but it still is possible at some places.
### On-site presence
Some countries, like Slovakia or Czech Republic (not sure about others) have a form of a distant PhD study. How efficient that is, however, is another story. In Germany, it also is possible to be a PhD student without being employed at the university, this is quite normal for students enrolled at a Universities of Applied Sciences (Fachhochschule). The idea is that the student does everything as any other PhD student would, however, since the institution he/she is employed at does not have accreditation to award doctoral degrees, he/she has to be additionally enrolled at a university which has this right. I know that this is how it works also in e.g., Norway.
There is also a possibility to be a PhD students and at the same time being employed at a company. I know of few students like this in the Netherlands.
Now with both options discussed above, there always is a requirement of presence on-site. It is not strictly necessary to be daily, but at least part-time is mandatory. I did not hear of a place where it wasn't, though there might be instances where this would fly. The underlying idea is anyway that the student in the end produces dissertation and research supporting it in the same quality as an "in-house" student would. You won't escape this one and this is the main problem you should try to solve. Your question rather is: "**will my non-presence and no coursework allow me to produce quality research to finally deliver a good dissertation, or not?**"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My understanding is that course works is nearly always required for US PhD programs and very often not required for UK and other European PhD programs. For many European programs, you essentially apply to the program with a PhD proposal and you can think of it as almost starting the PhD post-qualifiers or generals. You'll be expected to have a Masters and to be an advanced student before starting and you'll generally do this by finding a particular advisor and applying directly to them.
That said, not wanting to be on campus at all is going to be a challenge — especially if you want to end up in a top program. In theory, this will be possible but most potential advisors may be afraid that by trying to maintain a full time job, you won't be able to put an adequate amount of energy and effort into your program. Honestly, I'd share those concerns as well!
I will add that although I know about a number of fields, I don't have any specfic knowledge about Industrial Engineering.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: A few more points on German PhD programs
* universities are more and more moving towards PhD programs with course-work, the ones without are usually the "old" programs.
The old programs usually take the point of view that the PhD thesis is your "private fun", you usually do not get paid for the research work. This leaves you free to have whatever daytime job you have. However, the experience is that unless your daytime job is to do the research, such theses often took/take *decades* (I'm speaking of 10 or 20 years; which is reasonable if you consider that the "modern" 3 years of 8 - 12 h / working day correspond to (4 - 6) x 3 years at 2 h / day).
* Some of the programs without course-work will require you to take a final exam, which can be replaced by the exams of course work.
* your search term would be "external PhD student" (externer Doktorand)
As username_2 already wrote, external PhD students are usually in research projects that involve a collaboration between industry and university. And external PhD students usually have to show up every few months to give their presentations, and they may be asked to attend the research group's seminar regularly. With seminar hours outside "normal" work schedules, this is possible if you live reasonably close.
* In the old "PhD is private fun" programs, PhD students are not paid for the research. However, they are/were frequently paid for teaching. Some PhD programs now require teaching experience - which means on-campus presence.
As far as I know, Italian PhD programs require the students to have a special kind of working contract with the university, so no external PhD there.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/14 | 2,105 | 6,985 | <issue_start>username_0: In Medicine, an Impact Factor of a journal is important indicator (IF) of journal quality.
Are there examples of conference proceedings that have a formal IF figure computed?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, the impact factor being usually the number of citations divided by the number of publications, it's possible to calculate the impact factor of conferences too. I know [Citeseer](http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/index) used to keep a "Venue impact ranking" in Computer Science, but the link seems to be broken now. I found however a [cached version from 2003](http://www.cs.iit.edu/~xli/CS-Conference-Journals-Impact.htm) .
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Are there examples of conference proceedings that have a formal IF figure computed?
>
>
>
There is nothing like **the** "formal IF". What you are referring to is probably the [Thomson Reuter's Journal Citation Reports](http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports/) impact factor which is one of the most respected measures in the academic world. As such, to my best knowledge there is no such thing for conferences.
However, there are other sources which could prove useful as an estimate of conference quality:
* As already Charles pointed out, there are exist cached versions of [Citeseer's estimated impact factors for computer science](http://www.cs.iit.edu/~xli/CS-Conference-Journals-Impact.htm), but this is too old to be useful.
* Furthermore, Google Scholar lists ranks of top venues mixing journals and conferences in their listings. [Here is an example of top publications for AI](http://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=en&vq=eng_artificialintelligence), as you might see, there are several conferences mixed in. They list [h-index](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-index) of the venue instead of an impact factor.
* Another very useful, resource for ranking conferences is [Microsoft Academic Search](http://academic.research.microsoft.com/), where you can find profiles of conferences, such as [this one for IJCAI](http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Conference/64/ijcai-international-joint-conference-on-artificial-intelligence?query=international%20joint%20conference%20on%20artificial%20intelligence) and they also publish rankings for different categories of venues, see [an example here](http://academic.research.microsoft.com/RankList?entitytype=3&topDomainID=2&subDomainID=5&last=0&start=1&end=100).
* Finally, you might find useful the Australian Research Council's [ERA conference rankings](http://www.arc.gov.au/era/era_2010/archive/era_journal_list.htm#2) from 2010. In 2012 they decided not to rank conferences any more, but the 2010 list is still very useful and at least somewhat authoritative. They would rank conferences into categories according to their own quality metrics, which however (at least in my area) correlate with the community's perception.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: At the moment, there are 56 proceedings-journals which have an Impact Factor according to the only source of Impact factors, the Journal Citation Reports (Thompson Reuters). These journals have the word proceedings in their title, and presumably concern conference proceedings.
**Later edit:** This list is just a suggestion which might help to gather some additional information. The titles have not been checked they really are Conference Proceedings.
```
- ALLERGY ASTHMA PROC
- ASLIB PROC
- J INVEST DERM SYMP P
- MATH PROC CAMBRIDGE
- MAYO CLIN PROC
- P ACAD NAT SCI PHILA
- P AM MATH SOC
- P BIOL SOC WASH
- P COMBUST INST
- P EDINBURGH MATH SOC
- P ENTOMOL SOC WASH
- P EST ACAD SCI
- P GEOLOGIST ASSOC
- P I CIVIL ENG-CIV EN
- P I CIVIL ENG-ENG SU
- P I CIVIL ENG-GEOTEC
- P I CIVIL ENG-MAR EN
- P I CIVIL ENG-MUNIC
- P I CIVIL ENG-STR B
- P I CIVIL ENG-TRANSP
- P I CIVIL ENG-WAT M
- P I MECH ENG A-J POW
- P I MECH ENG B-J ENG
- P I MECH ENG C-J MEC
- P I MECH ENG D-J AUT
- P I MECH ENG E-J PRO
- P I MECH ENG F-J RAI
- P I MECH ENG G-J AER
- P I MECH ENG H
- P I MECH ENG I-J SYS
- P I MECH ENG J-J ENG
- P I MECH ENG K-J MUL
- P I MECH ENG L-J MAT
- P I MECH ENG M-J ENG
- P I MECH ENG O-J RIS
- P I MECH ENG P-J SPO
- P IEEE
- P INDIAN AS-MATH SCI
- P JPN ACAD A-MATH
- P JPN ACAD B-PHYS
- P LOND MATH SOC
- P NATL A SCI INDIA A
- P NATL A SCI INDIA B
- P NATL ACAD SCI USA
- P NUTR SOC
- P ROMANIAN ACAD A
- P ROY SOC A-MATH PHY
- P ROY SOC B-BIOL SCI
- P ROY SOC EDINB A
- P STEKLOV I MATH+
- P YORKS GEOL SOC
- SADHANA-ACAD P ENG S
- TRANSPL P
```
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Some years ago <NAME> decided to drop Proceedings from their regular citation index list and start a separate proceedings index. This caused a lot of problems for journals that published papers from meetings but where the review procedure was as stringent as in a regular journal. I guess Thomson Reuters thinking was that proceedings would be lower quality in general. The solution to the problem for one particular journal (that did not have any wordings in its title that referred to proceedings) was to state in the journal "selected papers from the 'so-and-so' meeting". It would then pass as a proper journal.
I do not know how the proceedings index faired but obviosuly this meant that many journals were dropped from the index and they were thus not resulting in impact factors any more.
So from the point of Thomson Reuters, they wanted to separate possible lower quality proceedings journals from higher quality refereed journals and create a separate index for the proceedings. What the main reason for this was in unclear since it struck both higher and lower quality journals without distinction.
(I must admit I feel awkward using high and low quality in this reply but think of it as a relative term)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: hye PPl!
Excellent blog , Actually conference proceedings have no IMPACT factor .
If you are still aint buying it then read the link below
<http://conferenceseries.iop.org/content/quick_links/Policy%20on%20Impact%20Factor>
Policy on Impact Factor
Under current policy, Thompson Reuters (the owners of ISI Web of Science) do not calculate Impact Factors for ANY proceedings titles. Therefore, proceedings journals are not issued with Impact Factors.
hope it clears the ambiguity
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: As I just came across this questions. I think username_2 already came up with a nice overview. However, I realized that the SCImago Journal Rank indicator was not mentioned so far. According to [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCImago_Journal_Rank) SCImago uses the same formula as that for the calculation of the Thomson Reuters impact factor. SCImago also features many [conferences](http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=conference&tip=jou).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/14 | 2,683 | 11,408 | <issue_start>username_0: I was always wondering why is the impact factor of mathematical journals "often" lower than the impact factor of journals in other disciplines? I come up with some guesses that I would like to know your opinion about them.
1. Mathematics papers are so hard to read and follow (or so specialized) that only a few people can read and apply their results.
2. There are relatively a large number of subfields and branches of mathematics and only a few people are working in each branch.
3. The number of journals and papers in mathematics (divided by the number of active mathematicians) is relatively higher than other disciplines.
4. A mixture of these.
Please, share your insights about this issue.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> why is the impact factor of mathematical journals "often" lower than the impact factor of journals in other disciplines?
>
>
>
Besides your observations 2 and 3, my take on this would stem from the observation that the pace of work in mathematics tends to be a longer shot than in disciplines, such as biology where often there would be several competing groups working on a very close subject. The impact factor is calculated as "recent", but in disciplines with slow pace of development, sooner than a paper gets cited, it already falls of the considered recent period (2, or 5 recent years).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a lot of different factors, and I know of no reliable way to determine which is the best explanation. For example, one theory is that mathematics simply has less impact (in the non-technical sense) than most scientific fields. I don't believe this, but it's hard to give a principled refutation. The whole subject strikes me as a little silly, with lots of opinions and numbers with no clear meaning.
One important factor is clearly that mathematicians write fewer, often longer papers than most scientists. Another is the two-year cycle mentioned by username_1 (citations after two years do not count for impact factor, which is incompatible with both the time lag in mathematics publication and the time required to carry out research in mathematics in the first place).
Another factor is the size of the field. The highest impact factors should occur in an enormous field with some incredibly important research and also a ton of less important papers that cite the great ones. Mathematics is just not that large a field (compared with biology or medicine, certainly), and it furthermore fragments into a lot of subfields it's difficult to move between. When someone makes an amazing discovery in algebraic geometry, you aren't going to get a flood of mathematicians from other areas rushing in to take the next steps, because algebraic geometry requires a lot of background. I don't think that's a bad thing for mathematics as a whole (the things the would-be algebraic geometers are doing instead are probably as valuable as following the latest trends would be), but it cuts down on the opportunities for amassing citations quickly.
Ultimately, I doubt there's any conclusive or satisfying way to determine how much of a role each of these factors plays.
For some published commentary on impact factors in mathematics, see [Nefarious Numbers](http://www.ams.org/notices/201103/rtx110300434p.pdf) by <NAME> and [Impact Factor and How it Relates to Quality of Journals](http://www.ams.org/notices/200603/comm-milman.pdf) by Milman. The first paper focuses on the flaws of impact factors and their abuse/manipulation, while the second explains how impact factor calculations relate to mathematical publication practices (and some of the incentives for journal editors). Neither directly answers the question here, but they both shed some light on it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I must admit that I tend to disagree with the previous answers: while the description of the specifics of the mathematical community are accurate, I do not see why this should affect the impact factor (except for the time needed before an article is cited, whose influence is clear). In particular, size of the field does not have any impact per itself on the average impact factor of papers. In fact, papers are less cited mainly because *papers cite less*.
Let me back my point, first assuming we are looking in a field that is closed (only cites itself and is only cited by itself) and stationary (no evolution of the number of papers published or the average number of references per article). Consider the publication graph of a given year : it is a bipartite graph, whose vertices are papers published year 0 (first partition) and years -1 and -2 (second partition) and whose edges are citations from the first ones to the second ones. Then the (article) average of impact factors AIF in this domain is the ratio
AIF = (#citations from year 0 papers to year -1 and -2 ones)/(#year -1 and -2 papers)
which is equal to (#edges)/(#papers published in two years), since the field is assumed to be stationary. This is also twice the average number of references to the two preceding years that a paper in the fields has.
So ***the article average impact factor of a closed and stationary field is solely governed by the references habits in the field.*** In particular, this is not affected by the overall size of the field (e.g. math as opposed to biology).
Given the distribution of references, an expending field will tend to have bigger impact factor, as will a field that is often cited by other ones. I do not feel that speed of expansion is an important factor for math compared to other fields, but fondamental mathematics are probably seldom cited outside itself. This has little impact if one consider maths against the rest of the world, though, since math papers seldomly cited outside the field too.
Another factor can be the distribution of papers among journals: for example, if a field has only two journals, one very large and one very small that only gets the very top articles, then the (unweighted) journal average IF will be extremely high. I doubt this explain much of the difference between math and the other fields, since mathematics have a strong hierarchy of journals.
So, what we really have to explain is why math papers *cite* less papers in the two-years range than papers in (most) other fields. This will explain why they are less cited.
Then the answer seems quite clear: maths papers are often long to read, and take time to be digested. The core of a biology paper is usually easy to understand and such papers are more easy to cite. There is also a *small subfield* effect: mathematician can work on problems that involve few previous papers. This is different from the size of fields, because it is more about the degree of specialization.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: An interesting perspective here:
>
> <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, *The Impact Factor as a measuring tool of the prestige of the journals in research assessment in mathematics*, Research Evaluation **25** Issue 3 (2016) pp 306–314,
> <https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv041>
>
>
>
Stating the obvious:
>
> A great difference among the journals that publish pure mathematics and the specialized journals in other sciences is that there are very prestigious mathematical journals that publish a little number of papers per year. In other sciences, a typical leading journal publishes hundreds of papers per year.
>
>
>
And
>
> The index of obsolescence of the papers in mathematics is very long, and the articles start their influence in the mathematical research later than in other sciences ( Bensman et al. 2010 ). A 10–20 years old paper may be completely in order for a research that is starting now. On the other hand, the papers ‘start to live’ later than in other sciences. In the first 2 years the articles may have no citations at all.
>
>
>
Mathematicians also don't disdain old sources
>
> Mathematicians do not believe that only recent papers can be useful for their research interest. In fact, old papers and books appear in the bibliography of almost all papers in pure mathematics. Consequently, even the 5-year IF involves a too small evaluation period ( IMU 2008 ). This means that in practice, researchers take into account all the mathematical literature for their research, without considering that new references are in any sense better than old ones. Moreover, sometimes an old paper of a prestigious author is preferred to a new paper with similar results. Classical books in well-established mathematical disciplines are considered as primary sources and appear in the list of references of almost every paper. Also, bibliographic material that is never considered as primary sources in other disciplines—specialized books, doctoral thesis, (even unpublished) lecture notes—are usual references in mathematical papers. These sources of information are not considered for the computation of the IF. Summing up all these aspects, it can be said that mathematics are in a sense more similar to classical humanistic disciplines than to the scientific ones. In any case, the 2-year IF is considered in general as inadequate for researchers in mathematics ( IMU 2008 )
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: While I am not familiar in detail with mathematical literature, there is a factor I often see when I compare different branches of Chemistry, Physics or Medicine. Depending on the nature of research, it can often be built heavily on other papers and cite them extensively. For example, it is not rare that a short Chemistry letter of 2-3 pages cites other 20 papers, which includes important experimental details, reviews of other experiments etc. Longer paper, of course, can include much more.
What I see often with theoretical papers that they rely much less on others papers, therefore often cite far fewer - in exchange they are also far less cited on average. I can easily imagine that the situation is similar to mathematics, where proofs are not built on extensively on others work.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I recently started working at the intersection between physics and chemistry. As a physicist, it struck me that the impact factor of chemistry journals of a given quality is always significantly higher than the impact factor of physics journals of similar quality. The explanation is simply down to different citation habits in these fields. Typical chemistry papers will contain about twice as many bibliographic references as typical physics papers of the same length.
In an ideally isolated field where papers only cite other papers within the field, the average number of citations a paper attracts must equal the average number of references that a paper contains. Obviously, this simple models does not take into account interdisciplinary citations, and the fact that IF only considers citations received during the last 2 (or 5) years, but it helps to explain why the IF of chemistry journals is much higher than the IF of physics journals.
In a field like mathematics, where I expect the specific subfields to be fairly isolated in terms of citations, I think that lower IF can be easily explained and understood in terms of short reference lists being the norm.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/03 | 1,336 | 5,635 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently an undergraduate math major in my 3rd year (in America). I have taken lots of pure math courses, and anything I put in my resume tells potential employers I'm probably going to be an academic.
However, I still would like to know from current researchers what is it like to be a math professor. More specifically, I have already guessed at basically what they do (research approachable problems, teach zero or one or two classes at a time, go to conferences and seminars to get ideas, life is probably easier after tenure and more stressful before, pay is sufficient but probably less than industry). When I look up career-related questions on this site, I generally get questions dealing with the items mentioned above.
But what is the job satisfaction like (people probably get impressions from colleagues)? What sorts of things should one consider before committing to an academic career (as it's a long road)? What is the work environment like (what sorts of people with which one has to interact)? Which types of people generally like an academic environment?<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion, it really depends on the type of academic job that you want/are able to land. Professional life in (1) a top tier research university, is different than in (2) a medium tier Ph.D. granting department, is different than in (3) a Master's granting department with a more modest research agenda, is different than in (4) a predominantly teaching oriented, four year college.
The teaching load/research expectation continuum certainly varies across the four. On one end of the spectrum, say at (1)-(2), the teaching load will be light (as you describe) but with research expectations in terms of papers in top tier journals and landing external funding that is very high. However, even if the actual *course load* is less, you will spend a chunk of time working with graduate students in reading courses, research seminars, their thesis, etc. As you move from (2) to (3), the research expectations decrease as teaching loads increase. In (4), you very well may have no requirement to produce original mathematical research in the form of journal articles, but instead be expected to demonstrate "continued scholarly activity" which can take a variety of forms. On the other hand, you may be teaching 4 classes a semester.
Pay, generally---but not always and certainly not uniformly---decreases from (1) to (4). The autonomy of academic life is usually very attractive and serves to counterbalance a salary that is less than what people in some mathematical specialties could garner in industry.
In my opinion, the type of job one shoots for (and will eventually find success/satisfaction in) is a combination of one's passions (research vs. teaching vs both), innate talents (again, in both research and teaching), aspirations, competitiveness, willingness to deal with pressure, and geography, to name a few.
As a nod to pragmatism, one thing to keep in mind is that the *vast* majority of jobs are in (4) and (3). Jobs in (1) and (2) are highly competitive to land. I have many friends in all four categories who are happy and very few (none?) who are unhappy, although admittedly the latter category probably self-selected out of academia.
Finally, since you are a third year undergrad, you will get a MUCH better sense of how much you really like mathematics in graduate school. During that time all of this should crystallize greatly. You will also get to see the profession much more up close than you do as an undergrad. It is great that you are thinking of these things now; keep your eyes and ears open in the coming years.
This is all just my two cents. Certainly others may have very different opinions, experiences, and perspectives...
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I think it would be useful to read *Letters to a Young Mathematician* by <NAME>. It gives a great deal of insight into the mathematical community and the teaching profession in particular.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with most of what username_1 wrote, but let me mention some additional points.
**Many people that leave academia do so less because they're not "smart enough" and more because it doesn't suit their personality**. Research often involves long stretches of work with no clear signs of progress. To quote <NAME>: "Two things are required. One is a brain. And second is a willingness to spend long times in thinking, with a definite possibility that you come out with nothing." You may enjoy reading <NAME>our's article: ["How the proof of the strong perfect graph theorem was found."](https://web.math.princeton.edu/~pds/papers/howtheperfect/howtheperfect.pdf) (This is an account of the backstory of solving one of the biggest open problems in discrete math in the last 20 years.)
Particularly early in your career, this can be scary. Pre-tenure you **have to balance a desire to hold yourself to a very high standard versus your desire to get tenure, which requires publishing papers**, even if they don't always meet your ideal.
To succeed in research, you need to learn how to chart your own agenda. No one tells you what topics to work on, who to work with, how long to spend on a question, where to submit your papers, or which speaking invitations to accept. Personally, I enjoy making all of these decisions. But **for some people, this lack of structure is very difficult** to handle. It's **essential that you develop a clear vision, perseverance, self-confidence, and the ability to solve odd miscellaneous problems that arise**.
Upvotes: 5 |
2013/01/15 | 708 | 3,055 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in **artificial intelligence** from an European university. This year I am going to finish my PhD program, so I am looking around to search for a **suitable Postdoc position**.
I would like to apply to an important American university, named X.
In my research group here I have important professors that follow my work. One is my supervisor, an expert of artificial intellingence, and follows my work. The other is an expert of **operating systems** (i.e. different field from artificial intelligence).
This operating system professor in the 90s spent some years **working at the preminent university X**, and he still has a lot of contact and collaborations in that field.
**Should I take advantage of this and ask him to contact my potential Postdoc advisor at the university to which I want to apply, even if he is from a different field?**
Would it be worth?
His mail would be something like "Some decades ago I worked at your university in the operating systems field, and now I would like to recommed this candidate from artificial intelligence..."
Would this have **sense**?
Would this be **useful**?
Or would it be better that I **contacted personally by myself** this professor for the Postdoc position?<issue_comment>username_1: Put yourself in the shoes of the professor: what would they like best in a candidate? Contacting them yourself demonstrates more commitment than having your advisor do it for you. There may be cases where an introduction by a third party is best, but it seems to me it's better to use that only if really needed: guy is a superstar, your introductee knows him very well, or you are just trying to strategically probe whether a candidature would be well-received without actually getting involved yourself.
Also, you can get your advisor to follow up if you don't receive an answer, or just to help you when/if they are contacted as a reference.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You are asking about having a professor contacting someone on your behalf, which is generally good and positive.
There are other similar notions you may have preferred to ask that have formal terms:
* "Should I ask my supervisor to write a **letter of recommendation** for me, even though they are not from my field?" to which, the answer is *absolutely*. You usually get several letters. It would be prudent to consider that a writer who knows your audience will be particularly influential.
* "Should I ask for **an introduction** from my supervisor?"- This is also very common, but less formal than a letter. Your supervisor, if he gets along with you and has contacts in the right area, can send an email and CC you on it. You ask/answer questions and can passively demonstrate that you are amiable and intelligent.
I would recommend doing either or both of these things, so long as you are sensitive to a polite refusal by your advisor. They may not have the positive relationships you think they have, and do not want to embarrass you by a negative association.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/15 | 695 | 2,299 | <issue_start>username_0: I just received a PhD invitation letter from a German University which mentions that my remuneration will be 2/3 of full TV-L 13 position. I do not know what a TV-L 13 position is (Google is of no help here), and didn't want to be rude, so I am asking here first.
Is this a common position or specific to Germany? If anyone knows, currently how much remuneration corresponds to a TV-L position?<issue_comment>username_1: TV-L is the German public servant remuneration grade table (*Tarifvertrag für den Öffentlichen Dienst der Länder* (TV-L)). It is how civil servants Germany are graded for their salaries and similar conditions for their work.
Depending on where your position is, you'll be under TV-L West, or East, or Berlin, or Hessen. Something in your letter might specify this. Either way, there is information on the details at the [Öffentlicher Dienst website](http://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/tv-l/).
Assuming you'd be in West Germany, taxed as a single (i.e., not married or living with a life partner or children), this boils down to a basic salary of €2103/month with a net salary after all taxes and health insurance payments of €1383/month.
This will increase as you remain hired, you'll go up the staircase of salaries, going from 1 to 2 after 1 year, from 2 to 3 after an additional 2 years, etc. Each step is a monthly salary increase of about €150/month net.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Found this link after Googling for "Tarifvertrag für den Öffentlichen Dienst der Lände" (Thanks to [Mike](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/519/mikael-vejdemo-johansson) for explaining first )
**[Tarifvertrag für den öffentlichen Dienst der Länder (Collective agreement for the public sector in the countries)](http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarifvertrag_f%C3%BCr_den_%C3%B6ffentlichen_Dienst_der_L%C3%A4nder)**
According to this, 13 is the pay group for Ph.D. students and postdoctoral associates. And the gross pay is from 3200 Euros upwards. (Basically it would be about 2000 Euros for 2/3 of that).
BTW, in one of the invitations, it says "E13". I'm not sure what this refers to but, I guess it's same as TV-L 13.
Hope this helps, and if you took this position, please explain further about TV-L 13.
Cheers....
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/15 | 664 | 2,901 | <issue_start>username_0: In submission forms of academic journals, I often see the possibility to give names of desired / non-desired reviewers for the submitted papers. But very rarely I see fields for choosing an editor who handles the submission from the journal's editorial board.
When the submission form does not offer the choice of a handling editor, should one indicate a desired editor in the cover letter? Do some researchers (e.g. specific fields) commonly do so?<issue_comment>username_1: I would only do so if you have a very good reason to want a particular editor (or to avoid another one): while there can exist valid such reasons, it could also be a warning sign for editors. For example, if you ask that the editor not be the “usual” editor for your particular subfield, it may be regarded as you trying to avoid careful scrutiny. So, **if you are not asked about it, and you don't really care** (or trust them to make the right call) (which should be the majority of cases), **just don't do it**.
Regarding usage: most of the chemistry journals I know allow you to pick your handling editor directly from a list (although availability and workload management might lead to changes after submission), and some journals allow you to pick both preferred and non-preferred editors.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In general, I agree with username_1's answer—special requests for editors beyond the standard process should generally be avoided. The exception to this rule would be if you feel that your paper, may end up being improperly assigned if you do *not* specify an editor. The primary reason I can think of why this might be the case would be if your paper is multidisciplinary, and you would prefer it to be in a different section of the paper than the one it is "normally" affiliated with. Again, however, this would appear to be a rare enough circumstance that there's little to be gained, and more to be lost (for the reasons username_1 has laid out).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In my experience, more often than not math journals ask you to submit to a specific editor or indicate which editor is closest. If you're asked then it's certainly best practice to do your homework and suggest the right editor. As the other people's answers indicate this seems to vary by field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I actually have been in this situation, but it was mostly a "Conflict of Interest Issue", since my adviser was the appointed editor for the journal I was sending my paper to, and he was also an author on it. There had to be some email exchange, and it did took sometime. I agree that it is quite unorthodox. Mostly because it reflects on the editor as well.
Once, actually, I could not submit for some conference because he was the organizing chair of the session and the conference had strict rules against it.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/15 | 415 | 1,773 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm going to have my first presentation in some weeks. Therefore I read some papers and now I'm building the presentation with LaTeX.
In the papers, I found some very useful graphics. But for quality reasons I don't like to take Screenshots of the PDF's. So I rebuild the graphics to have them as vector graphics.
Can I cite them just like I took a screenshot, or is there a difference?<issue_comment>username_1: There are **two parts** to this question: **citation and copyright issues**.
* Regarding citation: cite the source of the data/graphics/charts/schemes.
* For the copyright part, if the presentation of the data is really identical, most journals liberally give permission for reüse (you have to ask for it), but require an acknowledgement of the form ***“Reprinted with permission from …”***. That should cover modifications in format (bitmap to vectorial, or bitmap downsampling, etc.), but I have already seen people actually note the difference by using ***“Redrawn with permission from …”***. Now, if the figure is based on the first one, but with substantial modifications, you can be happy with only citing the source, or possibly adding ***“Figure based on X with permission from …”***.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: For presentations, when you are using graphics from other papers, you refer to the paper. The most important think is not to pretend that it's yours and to point to the source (perhaps your whole point of this slide is to refer to a specific paper).
You may add "from [cite]" but usually it's "obvious".
Also, if the graphical differences are not trivial (i.e. programs almost *always* modify graphics anyway), you can add something like "redrawn from data from [cite]".
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/16 | 1,320 | 5,302 | <issue_start>username_0: I have more than one hundred pages of handwritten notes.
I made these notes while writing different chapters of my PhD dissertation. The notes include summaries of journal articles, my thoughts, suggestions by others and anything that I thought could be potentially useful for my research.
I am wondering what is the best way to organise and store them. Converting them into pdf is one way of doing it but I want to organised them in some way e.g. by chapter, or date or key words.
Is there any program or software that can be useful in this regard?<issue_comment>username_1: I use Endnote, which allows you to take pictures of the notes and put tags/dates/More Notes! on top of it.
It is very device independent, and you can do all the digitization process using an iPhone or and Android phone, of course if you have a good camera, it will be better for the resolution issues.
There is a company that does OCR for Endnote compatibility, but you have to buy their special paper, which is a bit pricey.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Perhaps [Qiqqa](http://www.qiqqa.com/) might be worth looking at.
It's a PDF / reference management system with particular emphasis (useful, novel features, not found in other such programs) on notes and links between notes on your various research papers.
...and STOP writing notes on paper! Write your notes on digital media and it'll make your life so much easier, especially WRT organization / linking / archiving / indexing...
If you're a scientist and want to keep track of notes you make, [Open Notebook Science](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_notebook_science) software solutions may also be worth looking at.
I wouldn't recommend EndNote. It's changed relatively little in years and years. Many of the newer PDF management systems have far better user interfaces and are in general more modern (and often free!).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: *It's not an answer, but it's too long for a comment…*
I have one word for you in the future: [**Moleskine**](http://www.moleskine.com/). Good quality notebooks, organized either thematically or chronologically, is a great way to store that sort of information. For notes, **long term conservation** is a big issue, and you have little guarantee that bells-and-whistles software X will still be working on your computer in 10 to 20 years. Simple solutions (both electronic and not) are the best for that purpose.
Finally, I have managed my notes electronically for some time (I tried many combinations, including iPad/Evernote/Dropbox, text files, LaTeX), but wasn't satisfied for the reasons above. I went back to dead wood storage (aka paper) with delight!
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I scan my notes to PDF and then use LaTeX to [add a custom Table of Contents](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/11082/adding-table-of-contents-to-existing-pdf) that helps with navigating the PDF.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: You could also have a look at Evernote, this does a nice job of organizing notes. I think it even supports making pictures with the Evernote app (android or iphone), and upload it (e.g. for a poster on a conference). I use to store computer typed notes, but you could also upload and store scanned handwritten notes. Evernote has a free account with limited bandwith, so depending on what you want this might or might not be enough.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I would second [Evernote](http://evernote.com). They provide really great handwriting OCR, the key is to remember to scan your notes in as JPGs (or convert them to JPGs) as Evernote doesn't OCR handwriting in PDFs. With their OCR, you don't even need to organize in the app, you can just search for keywords to find what you are looking for. If you are looking for an easy way to get your notes into Evernote and you have an iPhone, I highly recommend [JotNote Scanner Pro](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/jotnot-scanner-pro-scan-multipage/id307868751?mt=8).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Since you already have the notes written, it seems that mainly what you are looking for is a digital reference management system - akin to the digital card catalogs of the library.
This would allow you to search your notes for a key word or subject and then know that it is in notebook A on page 20. There would be lots of ways to do this but [zotero](https://www.zotero.org/) is very flexible and should be able to accommodate your needs.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I would scan them and save them to evernote. An alternative is that you find a freelancer (for example on odesk) that types your notes (software is not very good at recognizing handwriting).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: Even though this thread is old, this may be helpful info. You can use the Onenote program incuded in MS Office. It tries to do OCR on any document you either scan and drop into a Onenote page or "print" from pdf into a Onenote page. For notes that it cannot OCR, you can add annotations with searchable keywords. To separate pages of a large pdf document you can use a program like PDFill Free. Not a perfect solution, but can still be a big help in making handwritten notes into electronically searchable documents.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/16 | 1,498 | 6,043 | <issue_start>username_0: First of all, I've already asked my adviser about this, but I just want to see what is the overall idea of the community on this.
In Mexico it is usually required for the student to do this, but that is about the only place I have references of people doing defenses.
I was thinking of bringing bottled water, but since is the middle of the winter I thought coffee might be a better choice.<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on the department I would expect. Mine for example *bans* food and drink at a PhD defense, both because they think is puts an undue burden on the student (why should you have to cater your defense?) and creates an inappropriate atmosphere. Cookies, generally, are a celebratory food for example, and while you *should* pass your defense, having already broken out dessert suggests that its a foregone conclusion.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In mine, there are no conventions per se, but I've seen people get food ready for just after the defense. Since it's extremely rare to get to a defense and fail it, I'm not too concerned about the 'foregone conclusion' problem.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I think it's highly country-dependent. In Italy, it is normal to offer food after defending a thesis (not only phd, also bachelor and master), either directly on the place or by taking all the friends attending to a bar after the defense. Sometimes the university itself even offers a small part of the refreshment.
Often there is enough food that you can skip your lunch (if it's in the morning).
If you find it weird to bring coffee and cookies *to* the defense, you can simply move to a bar, a common room or another place to celebrate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Another variant:
My defense (UK) was informal, but very much an examination and as such there was no food or drink. However in the evening my supervisor invited myself and my examiners to a restaurant (not sure what would've happened if I hadn't passed!).
I have also heard of situations where the examination was particularly long and the examiners and candidate broke for lunch and came back - again there was no repast *in* the examination room.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: How I have seen it handle in France: usually, no food and drinks is given out during the defense, except for a bottle of water and a glass who are set on table of each member of the defense committee. However, as you say, it may be cold outside and committee members may be glad for a hot drink and/or maybe something to eat (depending what time it is). So, it is quite customary for the thesis advisor(s) to actually invite the committee members to join him some time before the defense starts, where they can make small talk and drink coffee. If the defense starts early afternoon, they committee can even go to lunch together, giving them an opportunity to discuss practical stuff (who will chair the committee? what order will people talk in? etc.).
Then, after the defense is concluded, there is a celebratory “cocktail” (buffet and drinks) to which the defense committee is invited, and to which they usually attend at least for half an hour.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: As a grad student in the US the tradition in my department was that all meetings involved a snack (usually doughnuts for morning meetings and cookies for afternoon meetings) and coffee. The snacks and coffee were set out before the meeting started. Our thesis defenses included a public and a private portion. The snacks at defenses were sometimes a little fancier (if I recall correctly, I sprung for a $20 cheese and fruit platter and a couple bottles of fancy water). As a post doc in the US the meetings typically only involved coffee. I think this was because a number of faculty in the department had strict dietary requirements (e.g., a number of vegans and kosher people), but I am not sure. In my current department in the UK we never have snacks or drinks. I really miss it.
I would suggest you ask other people in your department what is the norm. If the norm is not to bring snacks and drinks, think if you want to start a new tradition: everybody likes cookies/biscuits.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: As others pointed out, the answer depends on the country, particular university, as well as local habits at the department.
Just to complete the international picture:
In Germany (at places I had an opportunity to observe), it was customary to provide a treat in a style of "wine & cheese" of course modified to local tastes (meat in Germany :-) ) including a glass of sparkling/normal wine (usually "Sekt"), but all that **after** the defense. People would normally order the food by a local butcher (many of which specialise in this kind of stuff as a side business).
The same would go for some Eastern European countries, like Czech Republic, or Slovakia.
In the Netherlands, at places I saw, there is often a small reception after the defense too.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: I don't think there is a set rule prescribing the food and drinks that are welcome in the doctoral defense rooms/halls but I am afraid it is culture- and convention-dependent. I have never heard of such a thing that doctoral students can bring in any food or hot drinks when they defense their dissertation. Bottled water is ok. However, personally I don't reject any idea of taking food to defense rooms as long as the chair and the committees think it is fine. Food and drinks sometimes ease nervousness and anxiety and may make the whole process an easier one, as we all know. So why not food and drinks?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: It is illegal for a student to bring jury food. It is considered bribery, even if you give it after you are successful.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: It varies in the U. S. by field and department. Most at my school did not but I had relatives with opposite experience. Use your judgment and don't go overboard.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/16 | 578 | 2,570 | <issue_start>username_0: When I did my undergraduate thesis, my adviser was expected big on students expecting them working really hard, so it ended up as a reduced master's thesis (most of the reviewers said that it was an overkill for a B.E).
So because of this, I did my master's thesis pretty much in the same way I did my bachelor's thesis; the PhD dissertation was a different story.
What are the principal differences between these three pieces of research?<issue_comment>username_1: In a Bachelor or Master thesis, you have to show that you are able to apply the knowledge of your field to solve a typical problem in your field.
In a PhD thesis, you have to show that you are able to extend the knowledge of your field to solve new problems.
The distinction between a Bachelor and a Master thesis may be a bit subtle. Generally I think a Master thesis should show a significantly greater level of independent working. While for a Bachelor thesis your advisor could tell you which methods to use to solve a specific problem, for a Master thesis you could be expected to choose the methods on your own, and maybe adjust existing methods to better fit the problem at hand.
These are the principle differences I see, but of course its also depending on the specific student. A good Bachelor thesis can be better and include more independent work than a bad Master thesis.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would see the differences as follows:
* Undergraduate thesis demonstrates the capacity to apply basic research skills in an area of interest to you. At this level, the focus is on gaining broad competencies (akin to an overview of what research is all about).
* Masters thesis demonstrates the capacity to apply advanced research skills (i.e. move beyond basic research skills) in an area of interest to you so that you are able to incorporate some critical insights in your study. At this level, the focus is on developing critical thinking in a subject area.
* PhD thesis demonstrates the capacity to apply specialised research skills (i.e. expert knowledge of a particular concept or method) in an area of interest to you so that you can make significant and original contribution to knowledge. At this level, the focus is on identifying a 'gap' in knowledge and addressing it, hence you advance knowledge in a field of study.
These are are arbitrary descriptions as there are overlaps (i.e. all levels require critical thinking); however, the three levels are distinct and require difference level of competencies.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/01/16 | 568 | 2,363 | <issue_start>username_0: I am working on my MPhys thesis, on a certain dataset. Part of this dataset has been analyzed by my current supervisor during his PhD, with published results. He asked me to expand on that work by completing the analysis on the whole dataset.
When I repeat the analysis on the part he had already worked on, I get different results. Unfortunately he has not published any detail about *how exactly* he tackled the problem, and instead relied on his memory. He gave me advice like: put this parameter to 50, use feature A, use feature B, disable feature C and so on.
I was able to reproduce his result to within 10%, but yesterday I was horrified when I discovered that this was done without using one of the features he recommended, let's say feature A. I have played with the data since and am totally unable to reproduce the result (it is off by a factor of 2 when using my supervisor specifications).
Using feature A totally makes sense, so I am not sure on what to do: I am afraid that should I tell him about this problem, he would delay my upcoming viva. This has a lot of unwanted consequences, for example would force me to pay extra money to the University<issue_comment>username_1: You should talk to your advisers, and in good faith expect that, since everything is from memory, there is a multiplication by 1/2 missing or some minor detail. Else, falsifying data is the [9th circle of hell.](http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.fr/2010/11/9-circles-of-scientific-hell.html)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **In my opinion, it is absolutely essential that you are completely open about this**.
If you cannot reproduce his results, at least one (possibly both) of the following are true:
1. You are doing something wrong. You are a student and he is your supervisor. It's his job to help you if you are doing something wrong. There is nothing to be ashamed of. It's better to be delayed with correct results, than on time with wrong results.
2. He was doing something wrong. Don't be afraid! You are not accusing him of anything unethical (\*). If his previous results or his understanding are genuinely in error, he should be very interested in knowing this, and grateful if you discover such an error.
(\*) If you do suspect unethical behaviour, the question is entirely different and better asked separately.
Upvotes: 5 |
2013/01/16 | 1,054 | 4,458 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a postdoc (in computer science) and planning on applying for faculty jobs soon. During my 3 postdoc years I've had a couple of papers with 2 "superstars" in my field, whereas my current boss is somewhat less renowned. Most job ads seem to require 3 referees.
Now my question is, who should I list as referee?
1. my PhD advisor + the 2 superstars
2. my PostDoc supervisor + the 2 superstars
3. A different combination?
Would option 1 or 2 be perceived as unusual?<issue_comment>username_1: List all 4!
People will find it odd if you PhD advisor is not under the list of referees. The same holds for the host of your last position. If you are limited to 3 references then get rid of one of the "superstars", but typically job descriptions say "at least x referees".
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, if you have worked for your current boss for at least a year, not listing him as a reference will look weird. Same for not listing your PhD advisor, unless you obtained your PhD a long time ago (say, you have held 3 different positions since then). Thus, I would advise to drop one of the superstars if you are limited to 3 names.
Another thing to consider: you have worked with superstars, but if your relationship with you has been less close than your boss/advisor, will they write a glorifying enough reference letter for you? Unless you have made quite an impression on them, or you had an close relationship, I don't think the odds are in your favour (though you have more information to answer this question than I have).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not sure to what extent a letter from a "superstar" is that useful. Often superstars are only stars within their fields and not know more broadly. If you have a publication with these superstars, that will speak for itself. If there is a pending publication, maybe the letter would help. If there is no publication coming, it is not clear why you would want them to write a letter.
Unless there are odd circumstances you need letters from your PhD and Post-Doc supervisors. These people are going to be in the best position to write a letter for you since they likely know you the best and have the most invested in your success. As for a 3rd letter writer, you need to think about what the perceived weaknesses are in your application and who can best comment on them. For example, if you have limited teaching experience, you might want a letter from someone who has seen you teach or at a minimum given talks. Maybe your research is weak, then a letter from a research superstar might be useful.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with @username_1: List all four. You **must** get letters from both your thesis advisor and your postdoc advisor.
If you **have** to choose only one of your superstar coauthors to write a letter for you, consider the purpose of the letter: to help the committee make an informed judgement of your **long-term potential for high-quality, high-impact research and intellectual leadership**, or to put it more bluntly, **your likelihood of getting tenure.** The best recommendation letters draw *direct* comparisons between your research ability/quality/reputation and that of other people in your subfield at similar career stages. For that reason, the most useful letters are from people who have a broad perspective on the field, with *direct* experience with *many* other people at the same career stage as you. For example, someone who has served on lots of recent program committees can offer a good perspective on your *current* competitors. Someone who has worked in a strong department for many years can offer a good perspective on people who had records comparable to yours in the past, and how their careers progressed. **The research reputation of your letter-writers is secondary to their credibility in judging *your* potential.**
Also, in the interests of objectivity, each of your letter-writers should focus as much as possible on the work that they were *not* involved in. In particular, what you do *not* want is a letter from a superstar coauthor that talks about the fantastic paper that the two of you wrote together; such a letter will not be taken seriously, because *of course* they think their own paper is good. So ideally, you should only ask a superstar coauthor for a letter if they are willing to write a strong letter about your *other* work.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/01/16 | 624 | 2,631 | <issue_start>username_0: If a student acquires a good score in GRE, does it guarantees that he has a good merit to earn a good grade in a taught graduate program?<issue_comment>username_1: **Short answer:** No, not at all.
**Long answer:**
>
> What I understood from the official GRE manual:
>
>
>
GRE, just like any other multiple choice exam, requires fairly specific preparation. You need to understand how to go about analyzing their standardized types of problems, methods of elimination of the answer choices, and even sometimes think like the person who's writing the question. Getting a good score means that you've acquired these skills and can use them rather efficiently in the 3 hours you took the exam. This is what I understood by reading their official manual.
>
> My personal opinion:
>
>
>
Doing well on GRE does probably also mean that you can, in fact, learn how to do other things, given that they are presented to you in "standard packaging". But so does an undergraduate degree where you get to take classes and prove by taking exams that you can efficiently use what you learned in those classes.
However, none of these (and no other single thing) actually "guarantees" that you will do well in graduate school, regardless of what program you go into. It's just a metric that you should be able to do well, if you are passionate enough to do well in graduate school.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: My answer would be depending on which GRE are you referring to?
If it is a specialized GRE, like the one of Computer Science, I do agree that it shows some merit, since it test basic knowledge the students should have in order to start doing useful things as soon as they start their PhD.
If you are talking about the general GRE, I think it does not reflect well in some abilities like problem solving and scientific comprehension, since its math part evaluates how fast can you make calculations, not how deep is your knowledge of basic math.
Again, there are a plethora of factors that will affect whether you get in or not in a Grad Course, as far as I remember GPA also affects in some extent, since top universities want people that were at least in the top 1%
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The problem I see with the GREs is that the scoring range is highly compressed. The difference between scoring in the bottom quartile and the top quartile tells you a fair amount. The difference between the 90th percentile and the 99th percentile, where the vast majority of graduate students score, tells you very little. It is the difference of a couple of questions.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/16 | 521 | 2,482 | <issue_start>username_0: I submitted my final year research paper for a national level conference as well as international level IEEE conference. I was notified that my research paper has been accepted for the national level conference before 2 weeks ago. And I submitted camera ready papers, registered and ready to present the paper next week on the national level conference.
But yesterday I received a mail from IEEE conference by mentioning my paper is accepted for the conference and asked for camera ready papers based on their template.
Is this situation normal? Can I publish my paper on national level conference as well as international level IEEE conference?
Please note that there will be proceedings for both conferences.<issue_comment>username_1: You cannot publish the same paper at these two conference. For an IEEE conference publication, you have to transfer copyright on the paper to the IEEE, which precludes publication in another proceedings.
You shouldn't have submitted the same paper to two places simultaneously. It's clearly against ethical standards in academics. It is not your fault, if there wasn't a clear indication on the conference submission site, and your advisor hasn't intervened (he should have). Still you have to deal with the consequences now.
And the consequences are that you have to withdraw your paper from one of these conferences. If you have the choice, it would probably be better to withdraw from the national conference. Call yourself lucky if you don't get into deeper trouble from this.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In Japan, they have a loophole for this, and is based on what Silvado mentioned on preclusion. They basically say in the website that the conference is not indexed, and they only give handouts and digital proceedings with no ISBN number.
The document the IEEE holds the copyrights of is the document you have submitted after doing all of the modifications the reviewers suggested, that is the reason some authors get to publish their papers in their own webpages, as long as it is not the same document.
I would advice against doing any modifications to any of the papers, since it has already been accepted and it is not the papers the reviewers choose, it would be unethical and you can get in more trouble.
I do agree that you should withdraw one of the papers.
Edit: I forgot that the IEEE updated its copyright policies, you actually cannot do that anymore
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/16 | 954 | 4,099 | <issue_start>username_0: I have no academic (peer-reviewed) publications to my credit but close to 6 years of industry-based experience. I have just completed a PhD in sociology.
Does my work in industry carry any weight in academia?
My work in industry included activities such as developing codes and operational manuals in a particular field to be used by operators in that field (e.g., a health and safety manual).<issue_comment>username_1: Weight in academia is carried mostly by peer-reviewed research publications, published in academically reputable venues such as research journals, conferences, books with reputable publishers, reputable preprint servers, ... If you get these publications from industry research, you get academic weight. A famous example for prominent research in electrical engineering done in industry are the [Bell laboratories](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Labs).
Codes and operational manuals are not academic publications, and typically carry little weight. In order to get that, you have to publish academic papers about the codes and manuals, or publish papers about research results obtained with them.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Does industry research carry any weight in academia? It varies. It varies by subject, by institution, by the individuals doing the hiring.
Are there subjects, places, people where industry research can get you a post even with no journal papers? Yes. Are such appointments common? Not anywhere I know of.
A good employer (those are the ones you want, right?) will be able to look past the traditional indicators of a good researcher (PhD, journal papers, career in academia), and look at other, non-traditional ones. But that takes time and effort, and hiring can be a drain on those as it is, so you'd need to give a potential employer some really good reasons up front why they should put the effort in to establishing your abilities.
A personal recommendation from a senior academic, or from a retired senior academic - one who's already trusted and respected by the employer you're targetting - is the sort of thing that can help open doors for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The problem here is with your use of the phrase "industry research". Writing codes and manuals isn't actually research.
Research is research: if it is good research, it counts and definitely carries weight in academia. Research is evaluated by its merit (e.g., intellectual depth, correctness, importance) and its impact (how has it changed practice? how has it changed the course of research done by other researchers?). The names or affiliations of who did the research is irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether the work was done in a university or in a company. It doesn't matter whether the affiliation on the title is a university or a company. What matters is the *content* of the paper.
If it's good research, it carries weight with academia. It also carries weight with industry research labs.
However, writing health and safety manuals is not research. You shouldn't call it "industry research". You should call it "writing health and safety manuals". And if it's not research, it doesn't count towards your research record and doesn't carry weight.
A good indicator of research is that it is (a) novel, and (b) published in a highly regarded, (c) peer-reviewed forum.
(The question gets more interesting if we are talking about people who do novel, scientific research that could have been published in a peer-reviewed forum, but isn't, because the company wants to keep the results secret. This kind of research is harder for academics to evaluate, and thus might not carry as much weight with academia, because it isn't published. In that case, it's not that the research was performed in industry so much as that the research was never published. In any case, it sounds like that's relevant to you, based upon what you've told us here. Writing health and safety manuals is most likely not something that could have been published in a peer-reviewed conference or journal.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/01/17 | 510 | 2,150 | <issue_start>username_0: This may be a naive question but it would greatly assist me in preparing my first paper for a peer-reviewed journal.
I can identify at least 4 papers that I can extract from my recently completed PhD dissertation in the social sciences.
What do reviewers look for in order to assess that a paper is suitable for publication in their peer reviewed journal?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking, they are looking for something *new* which contributes to the current literature of the field.
If your paper fits in this context (i.e. you believe your paper will enhance/improve current methods or even solve particular problem, then you got ***publishable* work** regardless of the reviewing output.
For a particular journal, other factors are added to the significance of the work (for example journal scope, writing level, paper format and methodology).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is definitely not a naive question.
The best you can do is to understand the position of a hypothetical (ideal/unbiased) reviewer and immediately from that you will get answers to your question. Particularities could depend on the field (theoretical vs. experimental, etc.). Hence, look for answers to the question "how to review?". Already answers [here at academia.SE](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/peer-review) provide lots of relevant points. [Answers to this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/498/scope-for-the-role-of-peer-reviewer) are probably the best starting point.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This varies from venue to venue where you are publishing the work. For top tier conferences and journals, the reviewers look for something very new and adds to the current research literatures and if the work could help researchers of other domains then its the most important point.
For example, If my work is on say 'X' for engineering discipline. Now, if the reviewers think that this work X could be applied to some other field say (MEDICAL SCIENCE), then there is a fair chance that X is going to be praised by reviewers.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/17 | 2,825 | 11,566 | <issue_start>username_0: I was talking to a friend of mine, and he just feel in a deep depression due to finishing his PhD.
He will be defending in the coming weeks, and there is a high likelihood he will pass.
In his words, he doesn't really feel he has learned anything PhD worthy, he only has one Journal paper and no conference papers (in his area conf papers are not worth much anyway). According to him, one of the postdocs kept his research at bay by denying him access to the machines he need to do experiments (something CMOS related, not really sure what). And in his own words, the same guy basically did the same experiments he was planning and wrote a couple of papers.
Of course he tried to tell his professor, but apparently he couldn't care less.
By now, he just feels that he lost 3 years of his life doing a PhD. And he mentioned that he might sue the Professor/University for this.
I take his word for all of this, and I have no real means to corroborate it to be truth. But it kept me thinking about one thing.
Is a student entitled to sue/demand a reimbursement/etc if he/she feels like the past years have been an utter waste of time?
Is there any mechanism in your universities to do this?
I've heard of similar cases of professors abusing of students in the same way in some US Universities (big/fancy ones by the way)<issue_comment>username_1: There sure are cases, every now and then, of researchers (professors or other) abusing students in various ways. As everyone, I have heard stories, and I know at least a couple of people who have been put in dramatic situations during their PhD. However bad the behavior of the advisor is, it turns out that there are multiple venues one can try, during the PhD, when the alarm flag is raised. These depend on the institution and type of employment, but they include:
* Going to see the PhD program director, explaining your situation (diplomatically) and asking for advice (read: help).
* Finding a friendly researcher/professor in your department, and ask him for advice (and possibly help) with your issue. They know the people and local “politics”, and might have efficient advice.
* Your employer's HR department
* Going to your professor's hierarchy (department chair, dean, …). As a last recourse, file a formal complaint.
* Get someone to speak for you: a union representative, a member of the local “PhD association”, etc. That can help if you are worried about the fallout of intervening directly.
* Changing your plans to work on a more “independent” research. In your example, your friend was denied access to a given experiment. If the experiment had broken down beyond repair, he sure could reörient his research, so the same thing could be done in the case at hand (I'm not saying it's easy).
* Walking out (or, as JeffE would surely say: **don't walk, run!**)
Regarding legal action: I don't think this avenue can lead anywhere, unless there is factual evidence of gross misconduct or unethical activity. The burden of proof relies on your friend, and I think it will actually be harder to complain after the fact if he did not raise his concerns formally during his PhD.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Strangely enough it depends on the legal system, as that describes the burden of proof. My advise is go see a lawyer... But...
I have had a harrowing experience with what l can best describe as a macho thesis advisor, a personae dramatica. Much of the assault was verbal, but that does not mean that there is no evidence. I have annacodotal emails, he even sent me threatening Emails and lied to my mum! shitty behaviour.
Instead of attacking the problem as if it's is you against the world, think about it differently.
1. Does the school have a contractual system in place with the student and thesis advisor? In my previous UK school, that is not the case, so in most common law jurisdictions and quiet a few civil law jurisdictions too, that is a no no...
2. Case law, yes ask your lawyer to look into case law, in fact it's so easy nowerdays, you can do it by yourself. You need to find some precedent, even in civil law, which generally has a rule, that says contracts that cause undue hardship are illegal, and when there is no contract, and you have suffered undue hardship because you were unable to complete your thesis, tends to be sufficient evidence.
3. Malpractice suites in medicine and the police turn around the expertise embedded in a expert, or someone with special skill and experience. The school has a greater duty of care under common law and under certain civil law jurisdictions, that is an avenue to pursue.
4. Increasingly in many jurisdictions, when it comes to experts as thesis advisors, the burden of evidence has come down, and you can use here say, and indirect evidence. So this line of mechanistic thinking is wrong. The law is not black letter, and if it is, then it would surely be unjust.
5. What are you aiming for? Be like a Vulcan and think about it logically. My thesis advisor, was sure of his superior position, and that he could bully me around, and lie to me in my face, that is a breach of conduct, and that is easy to prove. If it's sexual, then it's even easier. You should not think about suing to win, you should think about suing to damage someone's career and the reputation of the school instead. It's a bit like opting for a constant stalemate, like in chess, to prolong the game, and await your opportunity to strike. Then, mind the Star Trek cliche, a legal case can said, to be revenge, and that is best served cold.
6. You should look at the schools previous record with dealing with thesis advisor problems... Like in my previous school they swept everything under the carpet, even plagerism, and used the data protection act in the UK to avoid dealing with a problem, you have them! When a institution hides behind privacy issues, and does not deal with the real issues, they are not fair or just.
7. Read through the student booklet and if it says, that they will fairly and justly deal with complaints and they have not, even with small complaints then they are breaking their own contract with you. In our student book it says, l must go to make the complaint to a staff member, and and and... And they would resolve it fairly, but if they blame you, and don't listen, in your and other peoples case, there is a pattern of political game playing and failing to do the right thing. A lot of the contractual relationships can not be put down on paper, and is open to interpretation. You may not be able to sue your thesis advisor, but you can sue the school for they employ him, on grounds other than the thesis advisor.
8. Think about it this way, you can damage your opponent. A lot of the education you receive, is based on an unwritten contact for services. And even if there is a contrAct, you can poke holes into it. Maybe you can sue them for an unsafe work environment, and force the lab to be closed down. If l were a school, l would be very upset, but you, as an innocent whistle blower with a slightly alter our, but ethically just motive, well the law will see you in a good light. Also if the school fails to give you an adequate answer to a problem, or does not help you, but protects the to hear that is a good grounds to sue on.
9. Remember in law nothing is the way it seems... Smoke and mirrors.
you are thinking about it all wrong, remove the emotion, and think about maiming and hurting your opponent. My thesis advisor is very confident he is safe because of his position, well he has another thing coming. Not through anger and emotion, but through cold hard logic, find a flaw in the system and pursue that, and do it to damage the schools reputation. If they damage you, you damage them back using the law, and above all doing the right thing, because as institutions they must not think they can get away with abuse.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not sure at what stage of PhD your friend is. Has he finished the number of years necessary to do the PhD? If yes, he can submit the thesis. One really need to find the fault in the system if he/she want to sue a PhD supervisor. Once he finds the faults of Professor with supporting concrete evidences he/she could be on safe side. If your friend has decided to sue a PhD supervisor at any stage of PhD, beware of rules and regulations of university. In PhD, when you submit a thesis, the first thing comes is the acceptance or the rejection of thesis from examination. If your thesis is accepted by the examination committee, you can go for examination. If it is not accepted, you can not go for examination. In case of the rejection of PhD thesis, they will inform you about the reasons of rejection. Go through them carefully. Find out the faults in their own research articles and their own books or dissertation. Write them in a contradiction report. Send it to them. You must wait for the appeal decision of the university. If you are not satisfied with their decision you can go to the court.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: If it is likely that he will pass, your friend should go for the defense first, every other aspect put on hold. As for a court case, it is risky; they will have to prove that they were harmed intentionally or through negligence (I am not sure the latter counts in a supervision process - I am not a lawyer!).
They will also have to prove that the postdoc basically took the ideas from them. This is quite possible and definitively does happen, however, keep in mind the possibility that it might have been the other way round: sometimes students underestimate how much they have absorbed from the research group and their superviser and believe that they have had an original idea, whereas they only had the final "flash of understanding" about what their supervisors and group colleagues have been talking about for months.
An emotional situation may cloud their self-judgement with respect to their contribution and taking it to court is not recommended, unless they are absolutely sure their idea was taken and they can prove it. Even so, it might not be a good idea, because these are murky waters. I have known a case of a student being upset at their supervisor only to come back a period later - with more life experience - to complete a joint paper broken off in anger, because he understood how much the supervisor had contributed in the first place.
Finally, not every PhD is a success story in terms of concrete scientific achievements - this may depend on talent, luck, circumstances. However, if your friend passes, they have achieved a PhD in 3 years and, no matter what, that's a pretty good achievement. Some PhD's (esp. in Europe) drag on for 6-7 years, others never materialise. So, while it may not look like it at this point, after the PhD, things may look brighter to your friend.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Learning is not an instantaneous event. You prepare and practice your brain for growth and development but there is a lot of inertia involved and it takes time. He will probably gradually realize what the studies has made him able to do, say over a.. 5-10 year period, maybe. Studying is planting the tree. If fertile land and skilled gardener and good care it will slowly grow, become majestic and sprout flowers or whatnot.
Heck some courses I took even 10 years ago I don't realize until now what some of the clever comments during professors lectures were about until this or last summer.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/01/17 | 1,168 | 5,096 | <issue_start>username_0: On one hand, this seems like the obvious thing to do: no one is going to be able to better testify to your teaching ability than a previous student. On the other hand, I've never heard of anybody ever doing this, and for some reason, it seems a bit silly.
So what does the academic community large think about this? Is it okay to list previous students as references when applying for a teaching position in academia?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see why you couldn't do this, as long as you made it clear what you were doing, but I think it would probably be a mistake unless it is in addition to the usual documentation (teaching evaluations, teaching letter from a faculty member).
At the very least, you would have to choose an unusually thoughtful and articulate student, someone who could discuss what's distinctive and valuable about your teaching. Even if you did that, there would be some concern that the student is not someone with a letter writing reputation they have an incentive to protect, or that you may have chosen a student because you couldn't find faculty willing to vouch for your teaching. However, I think there's a more fundamental difficulty.
Any half-decent teacher can find at least one student every few years who really thinks highly of their teaching. Maybe it's because the teaching style is a perfect match for the student; maybe it's because the student deeply loves the class material and is somewhat awestruck by the professor. However, there's always someone, so getting a great recommendation from a student or two tells little about how the other students felt.
If you have broader evidence too, such as strong teaching evaluations from your students overall and a positive letter from a faculty member, then this would not be a difficulty. (However, if you have these things then the student letter would probably not be needed.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Many academic jobs (and certainly ones with a focus on teaching) require a teaching portfolio and statement to be submitted with application materials. It is definitely appropriate to include any correspondence from students with this information. The teaching portfolio will also include student evaluations and any other material and thoughts relevant to experiences in the classroom.
I do not think it would generally be a good idea to use a student as an actual reference, however.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The look of horror by my PhD advisor said it all when I suggested I could be a referee for him.
This was in a casual conversation as he was applying to get to the next level and we were talking about our career pathways.
I hold a senior executive position in the industry so this was not far fetched in my mind.
Tell me about professional regrets!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: One of the best references written for me was produced by an A+ student of mine. It featured a great level of detail about my teaching style, and clear explanations as to why he thought I was a good teacher. (This guy went on to work on a Ph.D. in the top US school in his field, computer science; no wonder his analytic skills were top-notch.) He wrote this letter half a year or so after having completed my class, and he mentioned some off-class interactions we've had afterwards when I helped him solve his CS problem, so it was clear that we had an effective work relation. Faculty who came to sit in my class to oblige with the required "peer review of username_4's teaching" would write some crap in their evaluation letters, frankly, as their reviews would be way more superficial.
When I was applying for the faculty positions, I would ask the search chairs whether they wanted the teaching letter from my former student, from my mentor on the tenure track, or from the director of a teaching training program I went to in my University (yes, I did have all three handy, and I cared enough about teaching to enroll in such a program). About three quarters said they wanted the student letter.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I wouldn't recommend doing it, for a simple reason: you want your reference letters to be from indubitable experts, who can vouch for the quality of your work. However, **students are not experts in pedagogy**. True, they can tell the difference between a teacher who care and one who doesn't, someöne who invests time and those who don't, but that's it. A reference from a student would most likely comment on the
Yet, it's hard to find a good reference that speaks for the quality of your teaching. You could consider:
* asking the head of a specific program in which you have developed course material (or department dean)
* asking a colleague with whom you have taught a lot
* not a reference letter, but close: quoting from a professional evaluation of your teaching (if such exist in your educational system), done by an expert (professor in pedagogy)
In research, you would definitely consider having a reference from your supervisor. So, do the same for the teaching part!
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/01/17 | 304 | 1,363 | <issue_start>username_0: My research paper has been accepted for the IEEE ICCSE conference. I am planning to change the title of the research paper before the submission of the camera-ready version. This would be a slight modification which will not affect the context of my research. Would it be possible to do so? Is it okay if I request to change the title of my paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, you can do this, but you need to get an explicit permission from the programme chair(s). I would also suggest thoroughly explaining the change, as such a change request might indicate that you did a lousy job preparing the paper before the submission itself.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I don't have experience with conferences in this regard, but, I have done once with one of my journal paper.
After second revision (minor), I felt that the title was too long. So, I shortened the title that does not change the intention of the paper. For this, while submitting the cover letter (to the Editor/Editor in Chief), I declared that I have intentionally changed the title that does not necessarily change the goal of the manuscript. The paper was accepted and was subsequently published.
As others point out, even though it is a conference paper, you should explicitly state or inform the program chair about this.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/17 | 1,905 | 8,020 | <issue_start>username_0: From my research internship experiences (my previous University didn't really focus on research much) and what my current advisers told me, a *general flow* of a PhD is like any other long(er)-time project:
* familiarize oneself with state-of-the-art on the subject
* generate your own ideas (by trial-and-error) and integrate with current approaches
(with this phase becoming a lot fuzzier the more advanced your "project" is)
* write it up for the world to know.
As a fresh PhD student, I'm currently in the middle of familiarizing myself with the state of the art, following the advice of many older students (*"be a brave soldier in the beginning and do and read everything your advisers throw/send/e-mail your way"*). And I do understand the importance of it (in fact, more often than not, I love it). But, it does give one an impression of self-uselessness sometimes (I have a talk with myself every few weeks or so to remind myself of my motivation and resolve the "uselessness" issue).
So, my question is: **Typically, how much time would a fresh PhD student spend on going through state-of-the-art at the beginning of his/her PhD?**
And some sub-questions:
* is it expected/typical to produce some kind of output (articles?) *during* this period?
* what kind of output is expected at the end of this period?
* what would be some indicators that this period is ending which a student himself can notice
---
In the end, just to provide some context: I'm doing a PhD in Europe, and we have a limit of 3 years for a PhD (sometimes extended for up to 6 months) and I'm studying Computer Science.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there is a clear transition between “familiarizing oneself with the subject” and “being an expert in this topic, and generate new ideas and approaches”. **The transition is gradual, and it's called “the PhD”**.
However, there are ways to quantify this evolution. For example, ask yourself: in a discussion with your advisor and a few other experts on a topic related to your PhD, how able are you to make useful comments and suggestions? How often do you come to your advisor saying “I have tried to do X because I read about it and I think it can apply to my issue”?
Regarding the written “output” of the beginning of a PhD, it pretty much depends on you and your advisor. Mostly, the output is knowledge in your mind, but it can also be useful to make notes (both for yourself and your advisor) on each subtopic you discover. For myself, as an advisor, I ask students to contribute bibliographic notes (written or orally) every now and then, for me and other students of the group who work on related topics.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm hesitant to make broad generalizations across disciplines, but I've seen this pattern a few times in a number of fields, so for what it's worth:
* You can expend to spend the better part of a year (or more) familiarizing yourself with the field itself.
* You can expect to spend *another* better part of a year (or more) familiarizing yourself with the state-of-the-art in that field.
* You can expect to spend the rest of your life staying up to date on what's being done.
* While you're doing all this, you will also be implementing some of the research you're reading about, doing coursework, teaching, grading, writing grants, and doing actual research. This will take time away from simply reading up on stuff.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Initially, you should really just seek to understand. Thousands (or tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands) of brilliant people have been working on problems for many years. If you're going to contribute, hadn't you better understand what some of them did, and why? So read, think, ask questions. Your initial goal is not to produce anything except familiarity with the core concepts and techniques. Or, to put it another way, you should be producing ideas and questions, hopefully to talk about with another lab member or your mentor. If you skip this phase, you'll either be slavishly following your mentor's directions without understanding why; duplicating work that's already well-established, probably (though not necessarily!) in an inferior way; or working on something that is fun for you perhaps, but not particularly relevant for anything. (Many Ph.D. students, in my experience, do end up falling afoul of one or more of these.)
Now, you ought not expect at the end of this period that you'll have as keen a grasp of the field and directions as your mentor; the point is to start getting the perspective you need to understand why, for instance, your mentor suggests using a bayesian analysis of job-completion times to help with load balancing.
At this point--unless your mentor is highly concerned about this--I wouldn't fret too much about producing papers. Get yourself in a position where you can produce good papers. Once you're there, then work out the next part of the plan (you'll very likely find that it depends heavily on what you're planning to do, which you won't know until you understand the literature and appropriate techniques).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My advice: don't read everything otherwise you will never finish! Finishing your PhD should be your goal.
Become familiar with the dominant themes in your field and continually think how your PhD fits in the scheme of knowledge.
Focus on what is relevant to your research.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The problem with the general outline you describe is that it's top down, and doesn't reflect the bottom up nature of doing research. In other words, while it's useful to familiar with the state of the art, you shouldn't necessarily start by assimilating the state of the art in the field. That's too overwhelming !
The best approach early on is to start small, and work on something concrete. Doing a Ph.D is really like doing an apprenticeship to hone the craft of doing research. Starting with assimilating the state of the art is akin to reading lots of books on music theory before touching a piano.
So start with a small problem. Try different approaches. Talk to lots of people. Read papers that might have ideas to help you with the problem. Talk to lots of people again. Try more ideas. Solve a piece of the problem. Discover it's been solved before ! Realize that you've been able to recreate someone else's original research. Realize that **this is a good thing**.
There will come a time when you suddenly realize that you're familiar with most of the state of the art. And that you've been adding to it.
And then it's time to graduate :).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Your question likely indicates that you need to work on your communication with your advisor. Hasn't he told you what is expect and how you are progressing?
I will try and keep this answer focused on the question, but I apologize if it strays.
Some indicators that your are becoming familiar with the field:
* When you talk to your supervisor you are familiar with some of the
references mention and names start to mean something to you. Better
familiarity is when this holds when you talk to colleagues and go to
talks and seminars
* When you have read/glanced at most of the references in articles that
you read. Better is when the most exciting thing about reading new
literature is finding a reference to something you didn't know about
As far as output, ideally during the course of your dissertation you should become familiar enough with the relevant literature to write a literature review article. You should feel like you could write a review at the end of the familiarization stage. Actually writing a full review is probably a bit premature, since you want the review to tie in with your eventual dissertation. I would suggest that a useful output is a dissertation proposal with a strong literature review based motivation. This is not a publishable output, but it is tangible.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/01/18 | 756 | 3,282 | <issue_start>username_0: I submitted an article in a Reputed journal in mathematics. It is in review process. After 4 months, i realized that there are some trivial mistakes... Article is still under review with journal. What should I do?
1. If I have a corrected version, should I send that one?
2. Or should I share this situation with Editor?
I am feeling very bad because of me editor and reviewer are (will be) wasting their time with wrong article...<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, when you send a Journal to review, is not a trivial matter, and you must be sure all the math is correct, that is the reason you are supposed to have it checked by colleagues and people who can give you thoughtful insight, it would come as unprofessional to an editor if suddenly an author says: "sorry I made a mistake, lets do it all over again"
In the best case scenario, the mistakes will be so trivial that the reviewers will realize it and accept it given that you correct the mistakes.
In the worst case scenario, is because of these mistakes that the journal would get rejected.
You can always try and resubmit, put I would try a different journal.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You should do both. Namely, send an email to the editor, explain the error and how you fixed it, and attach a revised version, and ask them how they would like to proceed. They might
* Send the revised version to the referees
* formally "reject" the incorrect version and consider the new version a resubmission
* reject the incorrect version and the corrected version.
In any event, you must contact them.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Do not worry about this situation. It happens to best of us. The best strategy is to write a note explaining the mistakes and the modifications you have made to correct them. Then send the note and the revised version to the editor.
Please note that it is very important to list all the modifications of the revised version.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I think it depends to some extent on the magnitude of the error, and the complexity of the correction.
If you have found a serious error in one of the results, and the correction involves major changes to the proof, or requires a significantly stronger hypothesis or weaker conclusion, then I agree with the other answers that you should contact the editor and ask that the corrected version be sent to the referee (include a list of the changes you made). Otherwise the referee may waste a lot of time sorting it out, or just reject the paper.
If you have found some typographical errors, or a stray factor of 2 in a constant, or omitted an obvious hypothesis in a lemma, then I would not bother the editor and referee with it. Minor errors like this should not affect the acceptance of the paper; the referee should have no trouble realizing what you meant (or may overlook it completely). If the paper is accepted, you can include the correction with any other revisions requested by the referee (as before, include a list of all changes). If the paper is rejected, it wouldn't be because of these errors, and you can simply fix them before submitting to a new journal.
You'll have to decide where your corrections fall between these two.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/01/18 | 887 | 2,847 | <issue_start>username_0: I finished my (german) Dipl.-Ing. (FH) degree after 4 1/2 years of studying. After that I started to work and studied parallel via a correspondence course. I'll now shortly (hopefully ;-) ) have the additional title of a MSc. That took me 2 1/2 years but only in part time, so the amount of time I invested was much less, than that for my Diploma.
So in order to reflect the increase in qualification I'd put the degrees like that:
>
> **Dipl.-Ing. (FH), MSc.** Firstname Lastname
>
>
>
But as the Master is sometimes regarded as a higher form of qualification than the Diploma, it might be correct like this:
>
> **MSc., Dipl.-Ing. (FH)** Firstname Lastname
>
>
>
**What's the correct order?**
---
edit:
Like it was pointed out the MSc. is written after the name. So the choice is between:
>
> **Dipl.-Ing. (FH)** Firstname Lastname, **MSc.**
>
>
> **Dipl.-Ing. (FH)** Firstname Lastname
>
>
> Firstname Lastname, **MSc.**
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: It seems there are not strict rules for this (speaking about Germany). There are few ways to deal with this:
* do not use titles at all except for documents like your CV. Why to list them anyway, isn't it just vanity issue at play here?
* if you want to use titles still (well, it's Germany, right?) list only the highest title you achieved as if it superseded all the lower-grade ones. In the case you have several on the same level, choose one. Should be good enough to get all the respect you are after (since you decided to use titles)
* if you should list the titles of different academic levels, then list them in the order of importance/level: [honorary titles] [prof equivalents] [dr. equivalents] [MSc. equivalents] [BSc. equivalents] [whatever else] Name [whatever comes after the name]
+ well, now it comes to my mind, that how the ordering "after the name" should look like is even more confusing.
* if you live in Austria, list everything you want and need in any arbitrary order (half-joke, of course)
For references check also [here](http://www.bmwf.gv.at/startseite/studierende/academic_mobility/enic_naric_austria/faq/fuehrung_akademischer_grade/), or [here](http://de.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080204062132AAZnURQ), or [here](http://www.haktulln.ac.at/ifom/sites/default/files/OeNORM-Aenderungen_Textdesign.pdf) (part Anrede).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You should notice that in Germany academic titles such as *Dr., Dipl.Ing, Mag* are writen in front of the name, whereas titles such as *M.Sc., B.Sc., M.A., etc.*, a written behind the name (see [here](http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademischer_Grad)). So if it all I would say the correct order is
>
> **Dipl.Ing (FH)** Firstname Lastname, **M. Sc.**
>
>
>
However, I would just ignore the *Dipl.Ing (FH)*.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/01/18 | 1,261 | 5,294 | <issue_start>username_0: Nowadays, in almost every scientific field, there are hundreds of conferences. Many call for papers emails fill our mail boxes.
Freedom of choice is great, but, **how to choose to which conference send a paper?**
Should I choose one...
2. based on the **scientific relevance**?
3. based on the scientific **vicinity** to your paper theme?
4. based on its **prestige**?
5. because of some official **ranking**?
6. because it provides **the best food**?<issue_comment>username_1: In an ideal world, you would like to choose your conference by their relation to your paper's main topic, and the possibility of impact to your field.
Now, you might be inclined to choose according to other filters:
* Based on its "possible attendants", such as a highly-esteemed
investigator you might want to know and get feedback from, in a more
personal way.
* Your own "travel experiences" (such as wanting to travel to a
far-away location, or to re-visit some beautiful place).
* Most conferences consider acceptance as a "at least one of the
authors must attend and present their work" binding commitment, so
unless you are going with your college's support, you must
consider the ongoing rates on inscription, hotel rates and
added values (such as travel expenses or food, among others).
Some other reasons might apply, but your main filter must be to choose a conference in which your work is closely related to.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Not a complete answer, but is substantially reduces the number of conferences to consider, the first things I consider are: timing, location, duration, cost. It has to fit into my teaching schedule and I have to have results and enough time to write them up, but not so far off that I want them out (timing). A one or two day national conference is much easier to deal with than a week long overseas conference (location and duration). I have to be able to afford it (cost).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Why choosin' a conference instead of another?
>
>
>
Conference is a social event. Even in computer science where conferences really matter, attending and presenting a paper either in a talk, or as a poster is still a personal dissemination of results. With this prelude, I argue that you should choose also (if not primarily) on the basis of what kind of audience you expect to attend your presentation.
1. sometimes, your paper is a message to the community (incremental works or methodological remarks come to mind). In that case you want to target precisely the community your paper speaks to. So even if it would be a small workshop without proceedings, if your result matters to the small community, you should speak primarily to them.
2. most of the time, you have a standalone research result. Q: What are you after with it? A: impact = citations. Hence, go to a place attended by those guys who are likely to cite your work. Usually, that is correlated with the position of the venue on the Top-XYZ ladder = badge (see below).
3. sometimes, you want to get a badge = have a paper at this prestigious conference which will shine on your CV. Fair enough, there you have the way to decide.
Ideally, you should go for a place providing both 2 and 3. Honestly, I see little good from choosing a conference based solely on its focus. Doing so, you might end up at C-tier venue full of people who are interested in the location and the buffet.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are new to research or new to a particular field, you should **discuss this question with a colleague** who has experience in that field (for students, this is your advisor). They know which conferences are the most important/useful/well-attended. After some time you will know this too and can decide based on **personal experience**.
Outside of expert advice or personal experience, here are my criteria, in order of importance:
1. It is sponsored by one of the major relevant **professional societies**. Which are relevant depends on your field. In mine, this means SIAM.
2. The work I would like to present is **relevant** to the focus of the conference.
3. The **timing and location** make sense. This can depend on many things, but it is less convenient to travel when you need to be in class (as a teacher or a student). You may have limited funds, or limited tolerance for long flights and layovers. Choosing a conference because you have some particular desire to visit that location is not generally a good idea unless the other factors here align too.
4. The **size** of the conference, in number of attendees and also breadth of scope. After many years I have come to the conclusion that smaller, more focused meetings are more useful to me, but I know people who feel just the opposite.
In fields where conference submission acceptance rates are relatively low (i.e., the process is highly competitive), conference prestige or rankings should indeed be an important factor. In others (like mine, applied math) conference submissions are not really competitive and there is not a hierarchy of conferences in terms of prestige.
For small thematic workshops, criterion #1 above is often irrelevant; but for anything larger it is essential.
Don't choose a conference based on the food.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/01/18 | 535 | 2,140 | <issue_start>username_0: All content under Stack Exchange is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. Does this mean that any academic paper that uses content from Stack Exchange must also be licensed under said Creative Commons?
If not, what is the actual rule on this part?<issue_comment>username_1: **Making a reference** to CC Attribution-ShareAlike content **is always okay**. In fact, referring to *any* work is okay, regardless of the copyright status. Only content is copyrighted, not bibliographic elements (including author names and title). For example, the [U.S. Copyright Office says](http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html):
>
> Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases.
>
>
>
---
Quoting is a more complex matter. It depends on copyright laws, and thus your country. In most cases, if the material is quoted raw and the quote is kept short, most academic use should fall under the doctrine of [**fair use**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use). By contrast, read also the article on [**derivative work**](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work) to get an idea of these two extreme cases.
This is mostly a theoretical question, however: the scope of fair use is grey are in US Copyright Law, and provided you do it for academic purposes and in a good faith, you won't get into trouble.
Finally: **if you really want to quote in a bulletproof way**, either (a) consult with a lawyer or (b) **ask the copyright holder for a waiver to relicense his content to you.**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: For quotations that are covered by "fair use" of the copyrighted work, you don't need to get a license. Even if you already have a license to use the work (such as a CC license), you don't need to stick to the terms of the license for this type of usage.
So, even if your paper may be a derivative work, you don't have to apply the terms of the license, and you wouldn't have to put your work under a CC license. As soon as your quotations go beyond fair use, you would in fact have to put your work under the required license.
Upvotes: 2 |
Subsets and Splits