date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2013/02/12 | 646 | 2,819 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm just an undergraduate math student, and I need to make a CV for a research application. However, from the CVs that I have already seen I have nowhere near enough to fill probably half of a page. I mean I can really only put my education history which is 3 schools. What else should I put?<issue_comment>username_1: You may want to consider looking at resume samples.
My university has some great samples that students of all levels have used:
<http://www.students.ubc.ca/careers/students/get-career-guidance/job-search-skills/resumes/>
Notice that many of them make up for their lack of experience by providing specific examples of work they had done.
For example, suppose you had done an empirical project for an applied mathematics course. You could list that on your CV and provide information on how you had gone about doing the research.
Most undergraduates, I find have lots of experience relevant to the position they are applying to from experiences that on face-value appear to not be connected. Think of anything that utilizes skills that would be relevant for research.
Here is an example of something I used awhile ago.
**Example**
Research Experience:
Honours Thesis - Aging, Risk Aversion, and Stock Investment
* Compiled and arranged data from the Survey of Financial Security.
* Constructed statistical models to analyze trends in investment over Canadian's life-time.
* Controlled for violation of statistical assumptions, such as: auto-correlation, non-normality, and multi-collinearity.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Before starting research, An undergraduate student really only has a résumé. A *curriculum vitae* is generally intended for someone who is intending to pursue a career in research, and has a somewhat "standardized" format (although there are still many variations).
But as a young student just beginning to do research, I would recommend that you focus on listing skills that you have that would make you appealing to someone interested in hiring you. If you have more than the standard training for someone at your level in university (more courses, have already done research projects, etc.), then you should list that information. Similarly, if you have special skills (programming languages, familiarity with specific techniques or tools, etc.), then those should also be listed.
Any jobs that you've held that might also prepare you for such an experience would also be of interest.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: CVs and resumes vary greatly by field and level of experience. A CV of an undergraduate applying to graduate school is very different than the CV of a associate professor applying to become a full professor. I would suggest talking to your classmates and the career services at your university.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/13 | 593 | 2,604 | <issue_start>username_0: First, I hope this isn't the wrong place to put a question like this.
I have a very specific graduate school question. I graduated last spring with my BS and intended to go to graduate school. I accepted an offer from (Big State School). However, during the summer before I could go, one of my parents became terminally ill; so I ended up declining the offer (well after the acceptance deadline) to move back in with my parents and help them out. At the same time, I also arranged it with my undergraduate institution to continue towards my masters there (since I had already acquired a bit of graduate credit) with the intention of transferring to complete my PhD elsewhere.
I am considering mentioning in my statement of purpose the reason why I graduated as an undergrad, have a semester gap, and then started taking graduate classes again at my old institution (I've heard going to grad school at the same place you did your undergrad looks bad?). But I'm also not sure if it's relevant to applications or even the sort of thing that belongs in a statement of purpose.
Would it be in poor form to do this, or should I leave such things out of application materials?
(reposted from MSE)<issue_comment>username_1: **Yes, you should mention your situation in your statement, briefly and unapologetically.** Omitting any explanation might raise a red flag with admissions committees, and most people will be sympathetic to your family situation.
You might also get back in touch with (Big State School) to see if they would be willing to reactivate your earlier admission. It's a long shot, but it couldn't hurt.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with @username_1's answer, but would reiterate that you should mention the situation briefly. You may want to consider a short addendum to your statement of purpose so as to keep the statement of purpose completely on topic. As to your concern about "going to grad school at the same place you did your undergrad look[ing] bad," your situation will cover that, but it is not uncommon for students to get their master's at their undergraduate school and their PhD elsewhere. That said, some of the best scientists I've known have received their PhDs at their undergraduate institutions, and ultimately it is your publishing record that will make or break future employment opportunities.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Better than just mentioning it in passing in your application would be to reflect on the illness and how that life experience has helped prepare you for graduate school/research.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/13 | 1,956 | 8,198 | <issue_start>username_0: This is a usual problem of mine, I have a page limited conference (usually 8) and my paper is 15 pages long, or in a less dramatic case 10.
1. How do you go about taking stuff off the paper. Do you have any rule
of thumb?
2. How do you know what is "irrelevant" enough for you to take it out
of the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Before you go about the longer process of deciding "what to delete," have you first tried to remove the "dead weight?" Academic writing is often quite leaden in style, and can be trimmed quite substantially. Following Strunk's commandment to ["omit needless words"](http://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk5.html) can often cut down a page or two out of your manuscript *without* sacrificing "actual" content.
If, having pruned your text, you find you still need to reduce things, ask yourself the following question:
>
> What information do I want my readers to retain?
>
>
>
Then ask yourself:
>
> What sections of the paper do not provide information necessary for the reader?
>
>
>
Those should be a fairly good guide about what to delete.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The first thing I do when trying to cut material is to make a backup of the paper (or a branch in your version control system). Cutting 20% is relatively easy while cutting 50% is much harder. For a 20% cut, the first place I look is the methods section. In my field we often include descriptions of methods that have previously been published. You can often save some space by simply referring to a previous published account of the method. In my field the methods section might be 10% of the paper and if you are lucky you can cut that in half, saving you 5%. The second place I look is my figures and tables. In my field figures and tables take up 25% of a paper. If you unneeded figures and tables, combine a couple, reformat and scale the rest, you can save another 10%. The third place is the efficiency of the writing. Obviously being succinct helps, but I find it helps to read your conclusions and then prune anything that is not directly relevant. These steps can help reduce a paper without changing the content.
If I still am not under the limit, I look at my conclusions and decide which one I want to cut. I then go back and remove the portions of the paper that lead to this conclusion. there is usually some setup in the introduction, a piece of results, and some discussion. This obviously changes the content of the paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There are many technical ways to reduce paper length without affecting your content.
If you use LaTeX for your papers (I highly suggest it), there are many web pages that help you reduce the number of pages without changing one bit of text. Do a Google search for "squeeze space latex" and you'll find plenty of information. My favorite one-liner command is `\linespread{}`, where is a decimal number, such as 0.99 or 0.98. I've reduced a twelve page paper to ten pages without any noticeable difference in formatting using that single command.
Obviously, you must stay within the paper formatting guidelines, but I've never had a problem with conferences and judicious use of re-formatting.
Other tricks that don't require significant content changes:
1. Find all paragraphs that have one or two words at the end and find a way to rephrase the sentence to make it fit on one line. This is relatively easy in many cases.
2. Make sure any figures are tight (while still looking good). For instance, don't have a title on graphs with captions -- the caption takes care of the title.
3. Make sure paragraph/section titles are a reasonable font size, and limit the space between the titles and sections. Make sure your titles fit on a single line. Sometimes you can get away with bold titles in the same font size instead of larger titles.
4. Reduce the font size for references. I've used `footnotesize` references without anyone batting an eye.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: First of all, a convenient approach is to "publish" the long version as a technical report or as a preprint (e.g., on [arXiv](http://arxiv.org)). In this way, it is always possible to refer to missing parts in the shorter version.
If there are only a few pages too many, then it's probably possible to "tweak" the paper to fit within the page limit: scale the pictures, inline the equations, use only acronyms of the conference in the bibliography (e.g., *in POPL*, instead of "in Proceedings of the 40th Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages), transform subsubsections into paragraphs, rephrase some paragraphs, move the proofs into the appendix, etc.
However, if you have too many pages, and you actually need to cut some *content*, then it might probably be better to directly cut an entire section rather than some bits and pieces in each section. For instance, I've rejected some papers because "due to the lack of space", the authors didn't provide any illustration of some quite complex notions, making the paper not understandable. Similarly, I've rejected a paper that was addressing many different points, but never in depth, due to the lack of space ... so it was quite hard to see the contribution (it was not a survey paper).
If you can't find a proper section to cut, i.e., you make a single contribution and you need 15 pages to explain it, then the venue is probably not suited, and you might rather look for a venue with a larger page limit.
Basically, if you have a 15 pages paper and a 8 pages limit, write *two* papers!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't know a single academic who's been able to get close to deadline and not say, "Look we're right on the page budget!"
Here are some strategies;
1. Don't cut too early. Cutting too early is a good way of losing some important numbers or paragraphs that your co-authors will keep asking you about.
2. Cut stuff that doesn't fit the story. I'm in computer science, so conferences are archival, but in general, if something isn't important to the overall contribution, then it goes away.
3. Make really nice tables and figures. Much of the time, having these separated and somewhat self-explanatory may actually save you the space of having to explain what's in each figure. As above, if your figure/table isn't related to the story, then cut it.
4. Write more concisely. You could either write, "The participants we recruited for the study were students who came from a wide variety of majors including computer science, electrical engineering, chemistry, nuclear engineering, and physics." Or, you could write, "Our participants were science/engineering majors". Different details, but functionally equivalent.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: There are definitely some good tips already listed, in addition, here are some things that I've found really help:
1. Go back through your sections and write a bullet point outline of what you want that section to say. Assign 1 bullet point per paragraph and put it right above that paragraph. Go back through and re-read that paragraph making sure that each sentence supports your paragraph's point. If it doesn't, remove it or put it someplace else.
2. Go through your work keeping an eye out for terms that you use repetitively in each section or throughout the paper. If it's appearing more than a couple of times, consider creating an acronym or abbreviation for it (unless it's really going to make your paper difficult to read).
3. Ask someone else to read your paper and tell them that it is too long. Ask them to cross out or to mark parts they thought were unnecessary. If possible, have several people do this. Sometimes as the writer it is difficult to decide where to cut because you're too close to it. Having others read the paper and cross things out gives you a fresh perspective on if you're being repetitive or if some parts don't need to be there.
4. Take a break. If you have the time to do it, try not looking at your work for a few days or a week and then on your first time re-reading it make sure to mark any parts that stick out to you as unnecessary.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/13 | 2,016 | 7,911 | <issue_start>username_0: In recent years, there has been a number of quality peer-reviewed open access journals launched. Some of them are what I would call “mega-journals”, such as [PLOS|One](http://www.plosone.org) and the newly-launched [PeerJ](https://peerj.com). However, most of those mega-journals which boast broad scope focus in fact only on medicine, biology and health sciences (e.g., [PeerJ’s Aims and Scope](https://peerj.com/about/aims-and-scope/)). Why is that so?
Are there other such open access journals with high-quality, focussing on other topics (Physical Sciences, the Mathematical Sciences, the Social Sciences, or the Humanities)? If not, what is the specificity of biology and related sciences?<issue_comment>username_1: I think one of the major issues here has been the existence of [arXiv](http://www.arxiv.org) in all its various incarnations. Since there was already a major open-source distribution network—even if it eschewed important parts of the publishing process like peer review—it made the need for a *PLOS|One*-like journal much smaller.
A secondary issue is that many of the journals in the mathematics and physics communities have fairly liberal policies on the use of open-source repositories to distribute papers; for instance, the [American Institute of Physics](http://journals.aip.org) and [American Physical Society](http://publish.aps.org) allow publication within their journals, while still allowing authors the right to "self-publish" using their own version of the materials. Similarly, the [American Chemical Society](http://pubs.acs.org), while having slightly more restrictive policies than AIP or APS, still effectively allow open access after one year of "exclusive" access.
So, ultimately, I think the emergence of *PLOS|One* and similar efforts is an attempt to move more in the direction *that already exists* in the various physical sciences communities.
**Edited to add**: One additional issue that may explain the state of activities are some of the recent decisions by the NIH to require that manuscripts published with NIH financing (thereby including the majority of biomedical research in the US) had to be made publicly accessible within six months of publication. This is a development that has *not* been matched by the NSF and other major funding agencies, nor is it a rule in most of the European Union, as far as I can tell (although I believe the UK is haltingly starting to move in that direction).
As a result, there is a strong impetus for open-access in biology and biomedical science that is not matched by the other fields (which might not have nearly as much money and therefore would not have the clout of the NIH).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There are certainly other examples in the social sciences if you look hard enough, although they may not be as publicized as PLoS ones. For instance I know it is becoming more popular for journals to make back issues freely accessible after a certain time period (see for example [Epidemiology](http://journals.lww.com/epidem/pages/issuelist.aspx?year=2007), [Geographical Analysis](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1538-4632) before 2004 and [Project Euclid](http://projecteuclid.org/browse) journals). Also Springer has there open-access venues [(BioMed central)](http://www.biomedcentral.com/journals), which is mostly biological sciences related but has a few social science journals (also Springer has the option to publish an article open-access for a fee, although the fee is pretty hefty).
So in short, I'm not sure why there is a popularity in the bio-medical sciences (perhaps because of the sheer size?) but it is certainly a trend across academia for both contemporary publishers to open the archives and for new open-access journals to form (and existing ones to become more reasonable and respected alternatives).
Similarly to [username_1's reponse](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/7981/3), the [SSRN archive](http://www.ssrn.com/) is heavily devoted to Law articles, and many of those journals are entirely open access as well (see for one example the [Columbia Law Review](http://www.columbialawreview.org/)).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: First, I'm not sure I believe that it is true to say that, "*most of those mega-journals which boast broad scope focus in fact only on medicine, biology and health sciences*." This might be true of [PeerJ](https://peerj.com/) but it is not true of PLOS ONE. I have read sociological experiments, physics-based network analyses, and pure computational work published in PLOS ONE. I get the sense that bioscience makes up the core of their editorial board and bulk of their publications, but it's far from the whole thing. Also, there are other "mega-journals" that serve other communities and fields. For example, [SAGE Open](http://sgo.sagepub.com/) focuses on the humanities and social sciences. There are others and new ones being created frequently.
That said, it is true that the first and biggest mega-journals are more focused on bioscience than they are on other fields. I think that the reason is because the "mega-journal" model is closely tied to the modern open access movement which has its largest amount of support in biological and health sciences. Basically, I think that PLOS ONE attracts so many biological articles because they have a biological heavy editorial board. They have a biological heavy editorial board because they have leveraged the network that exists for PLOS. PLOS' flagship journal is, of course, [PLOS Biology](http://www.plosbiology.org/) and the organization was started by a group of bioscientists.
[<NAME>'s open access timeline](http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/timeline.htm) is instructive. Although OA has a broader history, folks like [<NAME>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Varmus) have used institutional support at places like the NIH to push for a set of norms around open access through projects like [PubMedCentral](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/) and requirements from funders to publish OA. The result is an OA movement that has simply been much more successful and influential in the biosciences than it has been in other fields. There are structural reasons this might be the case. Pay-to-publish models are easier to swallow in fields that are largely grant based. Biological and health sciences makes up an enormous proportion of grant funded research through the NIH, NSF, and other private and public agencies.
But my sense is that, fundamentally, PLOS ONE has provided the inspiration for most mega-journals because it quickly became the largest journal of the world and, through that process, managed to maintain a surprisingly high impact factor (~4 in 2011!). To the extent that PLOS ONE has created the mega-journal model, there may be a bioscience bias — especially early on — that comes simply from PLOS ONE's own roots in bioscience.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Sage Open covers the social sciences and is also another megajournal. Currently it is Scopus indexed and in the Emerging Sciences Citation Index
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I suspect that this is actually a combination of several co-occuring factors:
* The lack of an arXiv or arXiv-like service that has been widely adopted means that biomedical research largely relies on journal-mediated access to research.
* NIH open access mandates have helped drive the acceptance of open access, the tendency to put money into grants to fund OA publications, etc. which creates a *market* for new journals.
* The biomedical research field is *huge*. Consider non-defense R&D spending in the U.S:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Nd3sN.jpg)
If *you* had to pick an audience based on that picture, what would you pick?
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/13 | 1,149 | 4,942 | <issue_start>username_0: I am interested in going back for my masters. While I have been accepted by a masters program (quite a while ago) previously, I am looking at another university and require a fresh set of references. I have lost track of my previous advisors and am unable to get work references.
So I need to prove myself at this point to somebody. There are some optional courses in the undergrad that I am interested in, but to be honest I could just read the textbook and save some money.
So:
Is it ethical/acceptable to take courses for the sole purpose of getting a reference letter?
and
Should I inform the prof before taking the class of my intent if this is a gray area?
Note: I know that it is still the prof's choice if I get a letter and this method is nowhere near ideal. Just the best I could come up with.<issue_comment>username_1: Absolutely, this is ethical.
Life is about proving yourself, and if you want to take a challenge to make a statement, there is nothing unethical about it.
I would absolutely go ahead.
The purpose of a reference letter is for someone to make a character or professional evaluation of an individual. The reason as to why the individual needs the evaluation should not make a difference.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you take a class for the express purpose of getting a letter, are you sure the class is to your interests ? If it isn't, and you aren't good at the material, you're not going to get a letter (or worse, you'll get a tepid letter).
If on the other hand you're taking the class because you like the material AND you hope that you can impress the professor enough to get a letter, then that's perfectly normal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Students have lots of reasons for taking courses and I don't think I want to be in the business of telling students that there are right and wrong reasons to take a class. I certainly think it's a good idea for prospective PhD students to think about who might be good letter writers early on in their program and to make sure they work with some of them — not doing so can make the academic job market very difficult. I don't see this as being substantively different. If you take the class, do well, and then ask for a letter, you might get a good one. Or you might not. So I'd say go ahead.
That said, there is something very mercenary about the way you have phrased your question that makes me skeptical. Do you *really* think that working with faculty wouldn't teach you *anything*? If it's true that the *only reason* you want to take a class is because of the letter you might get, something seems off. Maybe your interests are different enough from the professor's that I'm skeptical that this person would be such a great letter writer *for what you want to do*.
Being able to excel in a Masters program means not resenting the idea that you may have to learn from professors when you could "just read the book." I think it's OK to take a class for a recommendation but you should use this as opportunity to learn something you are passionate about in ways you could not with just the textbook.
Talk to the professor. Let them know you are an advanced and passionate student. Get feedback on your work. Go beyond what is just in the book. If you do that, you will get more than you would otherwise. In the process, you will also earn a much stronger letter. If you can't get over that hump, I suspect that your recommendations — and your experience in grad school — will underwhelm.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: This is a completely personal decision. Is it ethical? Sure. People audit courses for all kinds of reasons. You're not the first person that has needed to get references so if you want to do that then just make sure that you're ready to give that course 110% to ensure that you get a 'good' reference.
There is, however, another implied question in your post: 'If I just go back for one class to get a reference will it have any value?'. Again, this is highly subjective.
(and here is why I didn't flag this question as being off topic)
Your references should provide the admissions board with enough relevant information about your work, accomplishments, intellect, and character, to support your admission to the program. Taking one class, after a long academic absence, does not provide any frame of reference for your professor to make these types of assertions about you. You may find it better to solicit references from managers or people that you've done research with. Those people have the context to make a legitimate assessment of you and your work.
At the very least you should consider how your references support each other. If you need to have an academic reference and you don't have access to your previous references then taking a class to get one should be fine, just don't forget to support that as appropriate.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/14 | 1,651 | 6,724 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm in the following situation: In 3 months, I'll finish my PhD in theoretical physics, and I'm certain that I want to pursue an academic career. However, I'm just as certain that my PhD research is a dead end. (My advisor doesn't think so, but I disagree with him.) Thus, I seek to change the direction of my research, but I need a few months to obtain the necessary skills. Anyway, I missed the main application period for post-doc positions (in the US).
**Given the following options (feel free to expand this list), which do you think provides the best perspective of leading me to a interesting post-doc position?**
1. Finish my PhD. Get any post-doc position. Do the work I'm required to do there. Work hard in my spare time to teach myself the stuff I want to. After 1-2 years, find a post-doc position I'm really interested in.
2. Finish my PhD. Get a well-paying job in the software industry. Do the work I'm required to do there. Work hard in my spare time to teach myself the stuff I want to. Work harder to keep publishing papers. After one year, find a post-doc position I'm really interested in.
3. Abort my current work. Find a new subject and a new PhD advisor.
4. Live on unemployment money as long as possible. Work hard in my spare time to teach myself the stuff I want to. Work harder to keep publishing papers. After one year, find a post-doc position I'm really interested in.
Pros:
1. Get the PhD title sooner. Stay in the scientific community.
2. Get the PhD title sooner. Earn lots of money (6 figure). In a 9-to-5 job, have more spare time for private research than on a post-doc position, where work is never finished. Go to a foreign country.
3. It's what I should've done 2 years ago. I'll have the education I want when I finish my PhD, not later (but be older anyway).
4. No immediate advantages over the other options.
Cons:
1. If a logical continuation of my PhD work, I'll suffer from demotivation. My next advisor will not want me to work on other topics that I'm not paid for. Might have to stay for 2 years.
2. I'll move out of the scientific community for some time. I know it's hard to get back in.
3. I'll be even older when I finally get my PhD. Not sure if I would find another advisor. Open fight with my current advisor.
4. I don't want to live on unemployment money for long.
A particular question concerning the options above: **Does being out of academia for a year kill your prospects of obtaining a postdoc position later?**
I do have some collaborators who will help me to keep publishing, provided that I put enough work into my research. Also, I'm willing to familiarize myself with other topics on my own (a prerequisite for an academic career anyway).
The next application period will be from October to December 2013, which isn't far away. I'm sure I'll have most of the skills I want by then (and a paper published proving that), but still would have to work until summer 2014 wherever I am applying now.
Please give me honest answers, even if they hurt. I'll provide more information as soon as possible, if anyone has questions.<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, when you start a post-doc, you will start working on a topic that is rather different from what you did in your PhD. This is often simply the case because you will be working for someone new who has different research objectives. Some shifting of topic is not only permitted, it is required.
For example, in computer science, if you did your PhD on programming languages you could continue your post-doc research on another aspect of programming languages, though it would be less likely that you could do a post-doc in machine learning.
Think broadly about what your skill set is and be willing to learn new skills on the job when you start a post-doc. Your new boss will expect that you know how to perform research (at a high level), though s/he will generally not expect that you know every single detail about the research you will be employed to do.
Regarding the application position for post-doc positions. In Europe, for example, these are heavily tied to various funding bodies, and in my experience, these are available (at different places) pretty much all year round. The season(s) for each country will vary.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Some postdoctoral advisors have a policy of intentionally making their postdocs do something radically different from their previous experience. I know that was certainly the case with my postdoc—I had to start on a brand new technique and a completely different problem than the one I was expecting to work on!
So, there really is no problem with jumping into a new field, if you find the right advisor. I also don't believe that there's an absolute "window"—some people may still have spots available; it's a question of being the right fit for the right project with the right advisor.
You might also have some other options available to you at your current department—is it possible that they can keep you on as an instructor? That way, you could have a little bit more of a cushion to look for your postdoctoral position, while not having to worry about having to take a job out of total desperation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As one of my advisors once told me,
>
> The best dissertation is one that is written.
>
>
>
Tongue-and-cheek as it may be, I would strongly advise finishing up your PhD first, especially if you can do it in three months. If you have doubts about whether your committee will approve your work, then you should be having that conversation very frequently (at least once a week, if not more) with the committee members that you think will have an issue with the work.
If you are indeed "certain [you] want to pursue an academic career," choice (2) may be the hardest path. I've known a number of people who were certain they wanted to move back into academia after working in industry, but they didn't publish enough once they had a full-time non-academic job, and they weren't competitive for future academic positions.
Choice (3) would be a soul-killer if I were in that position. To see the finish line three months away and then scrap it for 2-3 more years of work? Not for me.
Choice (4) would probably be the worst decision -- every day you stay unemployed lessens the chance someone would eventually hire you (although maybe there are a ton of post-docs in your field). Proving that you've learned these things on your own is difficult, although you would have more time to publish (but will you have a university association still?).
Tough choices all around, but I suggest finishing up the PhD at least.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/02/14 | 3,847 | 15,905 | <issue_start>username_0: Question:
---------
***Are there any guidelines, sources, or examples of good practices for maintaining theorist's research notebook?***
Motivation and context:
-----------------------
Maintaining a [lab notebook](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lab_notebook) is a much advised (if not a vital) tool for doing research. Many do that nowadays also in [electronic form](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_lab_notebook). While the methods for writing and maintaining a labbook might differ in details, in "dirty-hands" (no offense!) experimental, or field disciplines, the basics are relatively straightforward and clear. The advice tends to boil down to keep a labbook per single topic one works on and then record all the experiments and thoughts related to those experiments into the notebook. Simplifying a lot, in the end, the researcher (team) would compile a paper from the notes in the notebook.
Now situation of a researcher in a more theoretical discipline is strikingly different. Usually one engages in research on several topics at the same time. The problems a researcher works on are often intertwined and one's view on them changes over time, often merging originally separate streams of thought into a single one, or vice-versa. The work revolves not around experiments which would have a clear objective, but rather around currently prepared papers and then "a cloud of ideas". In summary, theorist's workstyle tends to be very non-linear. Maintaining some kind of a notebook is still a good thing, if for nothing else, then for not forgetting about stuff. My question is about how to go about doing it.
I am after a practical tool helping me to *archive* my thought process for *long-term*, as well as efficiently *manage* and *keep an overview* of the evolution of the several interacting topics I engage in.<issue_comment>username_1: I cannot say that this is the perfect way to do it, but I'll cover how *I* do it.
Background on my perspective: I'm a mathematical/theoretical epidemiologist who came up not through applied math or one of the related fields, but through a circuitous route from laboratory biology. So, as far as I can remember, Science Is Done In Lab Notebooks.
A couple work patterns I've developed:
1. My lab notebooks are actually notebooks. I experimented with a Wiki for awhile, and just using something like EverNote, but I found they didn't work for me. They didn't capture the same feeling of permanent documentation, and freedom of notation. So now I use notebooks from [Black and Red](http://www.blacknred.com). Mainly because the generic black-and-white composition books remind me too much of undergrad.
2. Like wet-lab science, I keep one notebook per topic - but to address your problems, I tend to broaden the topics. A particular focused project (like something I'm being hired to consult for, or a one-year RA, etc.) gets its own notebook. Projects involving the modeling of a particular type of disease all get a notebook. Side projects involving a different aspect of theory...you guessed it, get a notebook. I've also got a small notebook that is literally "random musings and paper ideas". So rather than one lab notebook, I have several. These are identified in ways that are sometimes logical (a GitHub sticker on the very code-heavy project book) and governed by whimsey.
3. **Always have the book out**. Just like a wet-lab notebook, if you're working on a project, you should have the book out. Don't be afraid to write random musings. If you've done some math in your head, *write it down*. See also diagrams and sketches. Print stuff out and tape it in the notebook, just like one might do pictures of a gel or western blot. In the notebook currently on my desk, I've got several graphs, and even a printout of a question over at CrossValidated that makes up some portion of my thoughts at that point.
4. Reference yourself. Occasionally, as you've noted, ideas cross-polinate. I page number all my lab notebooks, so occasionally I will end up referencing myself. "See Lab Notebook X, Page 47."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a problem I struggled with for three years. My background is computational physics, and like you I have many active projects at any one time. My work involves three main activities: scientific research, software development and paper writing.
During my first post-doc position of three years duration, I managed to come up with many different ideas for research and features for the software package I was developing, but simply lacked the time to progress with them all. I flitted from one to another, trying to devote a little bit of time to each idea, but never making real progress on most. I also never kept a proper lab book, just having a directory on my computer for each project. This meant that I often left work untouched for weeks, and couldn't remember what I did last, often having to rely on time stamps to see which data was newest - very unsatisfactory indeed.
However, I recently made two changes which have made a massive difference to my ability to effectively deal with many projects. The first is dedicating large blocks of time (3 hours generally) to a single project and focussing on that one task exclusively - no email, no meetings, no Internet if I can avoid it. The other change is setting out a master plan for each month. I prioritise the best quality ideas and time critical work such as project reports, conference abstracts and talks. Other projects are put off until I have free time or they develop into something better, at which point it becomes a priority anyway.
My tool of choice from a practical perspective is Evernote. The ability to group collections of notes and restructure/combine them as needed is crucial to dealing with many related ideas which may converge or diverge at different points in time. Also when I finish a block of work on a project I religiously add my thoughts and results to the lab book, so that next time I come back to it (which potentially could be weeks or months hence), I know exactly where I got to. I also refer to specific directories on my computer so that I can always recreate the data/figures at a later date, without having to hunt for the right directory.
When I have a new idea I start a new notebook under Research, which contains a few bullet points about the idea - enough that I can recreate the thought should I completely forget about it (it happens!). Later I will usually come back and add a project plan, from which point things are usually pretty linear. Given each idea/project has its own directory of notes, I always have an overview of what is going on, while the linear series of notes catalogues the thought processes and data. Using this approach I find it much easier to keep control of my research and its direction, and I am much happier and productive for it.
For me an electronic lab book is essential. As others have mentioned if you travel a lot then physical notebooks are suboptimal. I still have a book for quick notes and equations, but they get typed into the lab book/LateX as soon as I get to the computer. Although my lab book is currently quite small, as it grows I want to be able to search for data and text. There is of course a potential downside with my current solution - it relies exclusively on the existence of Evernote. If the company fails for some reason then I potentially lose all my notes (since they are hosted on their servers). I am always on the lookout for new software which does the same thing, and preferably open source which takes away the heavy reliance on a single commercial entity.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: *First, the fact that you're asking the question is already a good step forward. Being a researcher is about managing ideas and data, and some researchers don't fully recognize it!*
---
After a few years as a researcher in theoretical chemistry (all computer, no wet lab), I have seen pretty much every kind of notebook possible:
* Single notebook documenting your progression linearly. I started with that, it hurt a lot.
* No notebook, everything in files: put a 00README file in each topic/subtopic directory, then simply write in there to document your progress. In meetings, either type directly (if you have a mobile device) or write meeting notes then scan them.
* Thematic notebooks (well described in other answers).
What you need is **something that works for you**. Draw inspiration from the examples above, the other answers, and *try it!* If at first you don't succeed, change the way you do, identify things that prevent you from fully using the workflow you set out to.
In particular, important factors to be considered are: ***how much do you travel? where do you work from?*** For me, thematic notebooks are a no-go because I work from the office, work from home, work from conferences, work from hotels and planes, work from vacation (*I know, I know…*). Thus, I can't carry around 5 or 10 notebooks.
To be honest, the combination I have seen used very efficiently (by me or people around me) is:
>
> **One single “take everywhere” notebook** (I make it a [Moleskine](http://www.moleskine.com/en/): because it feels special, it makes me *want* to write in it). Each lasts about a year. They are organized as follow:
>
>
> * at the back, few pages reserved for key information (important dates we set, strategic research decision, contact numbers for project leads, that very funny quote that had me laughing throughout an entire hour)
> * at the back, just before that: a few pages *per project*, with very high-level tracking of the progress (I write about one line or two per week, when the project is running). This allows me to remember
> * from the front: everything else, chronologically but clearly dated and labeled. Notes during meetings, notes about important stuff running and its analysis when it has finished running, etc.
> * everything else (long math derivations, paragraphs of text I started to write, full meeting minutes, detailed graphs): electronically
>
>
> You can further refine: a colleague of mine uses small colored sticky index-tabs on the top of the notebook to index the content that turns out to be the most important (important results on each project, color-coded). I cannot force myself to do that, but I must admit that it really helps her access older information quickly.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: (Supplementing [F'x's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/8075/49).)
Physical notebook
-----------------
I use it all the time, as it is the quickest way to write mathematics and jot diagrams. It's low tech, so it's "always on" (e.g. I cannot run out of batteries).
I have one A4 notebook (so I take it anywhere), with removable pages.
I try to devote a single page only to a single project. On each page I note 3 things:
* date,
* title (or, actually, a pictogram) of the project,
* "page number" for pages on the same project in a given day.
After some time (could be the same day, could be never) I take off pages, to fit them into thematic folders (and usually throwing away most of things, because they are "non-recyclable" rubbish; if it is "recyclable" then I scrap the important things, writing them on a new page).
However, such operation has trade-offs:
* (+) sorted by topic,
* (+) higher valuable content density,
* (+) can be viewed "all at once" by putting pages on a desktop,
* (-) I cannot take all of them anymore,
* (-) it's somehow easier to loose it, unsort, or torn/coffee split/... it.
Electronic notes
----------------
Electronic content is much more linkable, searchable, easier to share, more polished etc. However, it takes much more time to write formulas or draw diagrams.
Different things work for different people, but some kind of personal wiki (or a well-organized text file system) seems to work the best.
I'm not settled down, but I'm switching from [TiddlyWiki](http://tiddlywiki.org/) (very neat but requires a browser to run) to [Gitit](http://gitit.net/) (so I can write in Markdown, with LaTeX inclusions, in any text editor).
I tried [Evernote](http://evernote.com) as well (and I'm using it for other content) but for highly-linked content it does not work for me.
See also:
* [How do you keep your research notes organized? - MathOverflow](https://mathoverflow.net/questions/1785/how-do-you-keep-your-research-notes-organized-closed)
* [Is there any efficient non-linear note-taking software?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/109/non-linear-note-taking-software)
* [Software/App for electronic research notebooks](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1085/software-app-for-electronic-research-notebooks)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: If you lab notebook could be used to document a **patent-able device or process** then you *must* use a stitched notebook with numbered pages, *and do not remove the pages*.
*Even under the first-to-file rules*, some cases can draw on the history of notes and creative documentation. (e.g. same claims on the same day)
As annoying as this is for modern methods (hyperlinked docs, etc), there is no alternative yet.
(Source, a 20yr patent attorney's career)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I few years ago I moved to MacOS and discovered a journaling program called Day One. My journal is automatically backed up to a server. You can have one journal per topic, or use tags to identify research projects within a single "research" journal. Many of my thoughts apply to more than one project, so I use tags and one journal.
Perhaps the most important feature is that there are apps for iPhone and iPad, and you can add pictures to the journal. So, when I am talking to someone and she writes something on the board, I can take a picture and add it to a journal entry. I can also take a picture of a calculation I do on paper, or export a mind map (I love Inspiration mind-mapping software) to an image and import that into the journal entry.
I also have great ideas while jogging in the park, at the gym, driving to work, and I can add them to my journal from my phone. I can add longer notes using my iPad when at a conference.
Since it is journaling software, everything is organized in date order, but you can click on a tag to see just the entries with that tag. I don't know how I lived without it.
You can export your journal to pdf for extra backup or sharing.
There might be something for Windows too (not OneNote, which is more like a Wiki). I had problems with EverNote losing my notes, never to be found again.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm a PhD student in mathematics, and I am finding a physical research notebook to be very helpful as a "clearinghouse" between (1) my research scratch notes, which are very messy and usually on the back of paper that has been used for something else, and (2) my typeset notes or code. I first work out a proof/calculation/algorithm on scratch paper, probably scattered all over my desk. Then, once I feel that a given proof is ready to write up, I write it out carefully in my notebook. In the process, I often discover gaps or inefficiencies in my scratch work.
I do something similar if I'm reading a paper and writing my own interpretation of what I find there (e.g. if someone gives a constructive proof and I want to turn it into pseudocode, or if they prove something in a general form and I only need a special case). The notes I make while reading will be on scratch paper, often on the printout of whatever I'm reading, and then what goes in the notebook is my takeaway, ready to consult later.
I don't try to keep different notebooks for different projects -- my two or three projects bleed into each other enough that trying to separate them wouldn't be worth it.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/15 | 1,635 | 7,032 | <issue_start>username_0: As a **Tenured Full Professor** and given your long experience in Academia, what valuable lessons have you learned over the years that you wish somebody had shared with you earlier when you started as an Assistant Professor? Given these experiences what would you do differently if you had the chance?<issue_comment>username_1: Learn how to say **NO**.
It is very easy to say yes to every PC invitation, every paper collaboration, every committee, every this and every that. But this spreads your time too thin and means that you perform far less than optimally at everything you do. Ultimately, work encroaches too much on family time, and life becomes less enjoyable.
Also, learn how to teach properly. Take a teaching course or two. It will make your job easier and increase the amount you enjoy teaching.
See also: [What is expected of a postdoc?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3327/what-is-expected-of-a-postdoc/3328#3328). Many of my comments there are applicable.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: ### You do not have to accept responsibility without appropriate authority.
It's a classic problem in any organization, and it's related to [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/8010/3859). Some concrete examples:
* Rather than extend the deadline for homework when the bookstore doesn't have enough copies of the course textbook, give the students the email of the manager of the bookstore so they can write him directly about their situation.
* Rather than ask meekly for a bigger classroom when there aren't enough seats for the 47 students enrolled in your class, give the email of the department coordinator who's responsible for assigning classrooms and say this is the person to whom you should vent your unhappiness.
* Rather than teach a course that is watered down because it has no prerequisites, teach to the higher level students and explain clearly in the syllabus what you expect people to know. If students complain, explain to them your predicament (if you teach the basics, half the class will feel they wasted their experience). Students have more power to change an academic program by organized, constructive complaining than a non-tenured professor.
* If the department chair doesn't involve you in selecting TAs for the course you are responsible for, and students are not happy about the quality of the TA (or the TA hounds you for a lot of help because he wasn't qualified to teach the course), encourage the chair to allow you to be involved in the selection process (refer to the principle of authority and responsibility).
* If you're asked to be on a committee, insist that the committee have a clear mission that's feasible within the authority of its members. If a mission cannot be clarified or you can't identify with the mission, then minimize the amount of time/energy you put into it.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: While on the interview circuit I ask this question of almost every faculty member I meet with: "What advice would you give to a new assistant professor who's starting up?"
Here are some of the universal, non-conflicting advice I've heard.
* Put enough time into your teaching to do an adequate job, not an excellent job. Save the rest of the time for research. It was emphasized that you want to teach courses that involve the minimum amount of preparation as well. You can have a tenure case stopped in its track for poor, unacceptable teaching, so you want to ensure that it's maintained to a minimum standard, but it is rare to have a weak research program that's propped up by teaching excellence. (Yes, it's somewhat unfortunate that this is the state of things in the United States's higher education, but that's the culture).
* Develop your research program so that it is deep, rather than spreading out into too many research areas peripheral to your main research. Stay focused and specialize first.
* Be aware of how you select students and especially how the department selects students. This varies from department to department, but in general I was given advice to be reasonably careful when choosing students, and to consult with other faculty members to see if others know the student who's looking for an advisor.
* One faculty member I spoke with mentioned concern about getting all of the hardware set up (for computer science), and mentioned that was something that took a little longer than expected, so have a contingency plan to continue research while your own hardware's going through purchasing. This faculty member used another faculty member's cluster until he got his own up and running.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Can I give advice as a former Assistant Professor who did not get tenure? Here is where I went wrong:
1. Be quick to change. It takes a lot of time to change into a new field. If you feel you may need to do this to secure more funding, don't delay. Make time to continually evolve. Sticking to one thing may have taken you to where you are now, but successful academicians are continually branching into new fields and collaborations.
2. Collaborate early and often in your career. Do not isolate yourself (and be careful going to a department where you are the only person doing what you do). You will need collaborators to get consistent funding.
3. Hire the best graduate students and postdocs. It's tough when you're new, because you feel like you have to grab the first student that expresses any interest. The problem is you may waste more time and money training a bad student than it's worth in the end. The difference between a success and a failure in academia often hinges on getting the right trainees. Do not underestimate the importance of this.
4. Don't worry about teaching for your first few years. Do as little as possible. Same goes for service (i.e. committees). Most departments will give you a break your first few years anyway, but some make the mistake of volunteering time they really should be spending on research and securing funding.
5. Learn how to play the game. A lot of the effort to getting funding these days is about marketing yourself and your projects. Figure this out early. Why should people care about what you're doing? Why do you deserve this million dollar grant? Not everyone is trying to cure cancer, but you need to be able to justify your research to anyone. You need to be able to generate excitement about your research.
6. Think long-term in addition to short-term. There are short-term goals everyone has to accomplish, but make sure your long-term strategy makes sense for your chosen career path.
7. Figure out what you're good at. Before you become a professor, everyone is always patting you on the back, but that's before there's real money at stake. When you start to apply for $1M grants, you need to be an expert in your field. One of my biggest issues was I tried to do a little bit of everything, but in the end, I wasn't a true expert in anything.
Upvotes: 5 |
2013/02/15 | 1,493 | 6,407 | <issue_start>username_0: I reviewed an article and submitted my review along with a short letter to the editor. As a service the journal permits to see the decision letter and the other review. However, I am also able to see the other reviewers' letter to the editor, which is signed with a name. My own short letter to the editor I did not sign with my name.
Is this supposed to be? If not, should I do anything in particular if I do find out by accident?
The issue is somewhat addressed in some of the answers for the question *[Are reviewers allowed to discuss their review with each other?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/1609/1033)*. [One answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1611/1033) states *you're not meant to find out*, while [another one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1910/1033) states *once you've submitted your own review, it is normal to know who the other reviewers are and be able to see their reviews*. There are two different issues here:
1. Knowing the other reviewers' identity *during* the reviewing process.
2. Knowing the other reviewers' identity *after* the reviewing process.
Is case (2) normal?
**Edit:** I might add that the policy of the journal is *not* a double-blind: the full list of authors and affiliations of the manuscript were purposefully disclosed to the reviewers.<issue_comment>username_1: **No**, its not normal to know who the other reviewers are if the journal has a **double-blind** review policy ( my background is Engineering disciplines, might be different in other fields).
What I have experienced in the double-blind review process both as a reviewer and the author:
1. Knowing the other reviewers' identity during the reviewing process? **NO**, not normal.
2. Knowing the other reviewers' identity after the reviewing process? **NO**, not normal.
3. Knowing whether the editor accepted or reject the paper? **NO** (a very good practice as I have learned).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no good answer to that, and that's once again an example where the answer is discipline-specific. Many disciplines insist on double-blind review: the reviewer does not know who the author is, and the author does not know who the referees are. (Of course, in most specific enough topics, you hit a circle of about ten people who understand a given topic, and you kinda figure out whose paper it is even without googling it; likewise, you can often figure out the reviewers from their suggestion to cite their work.) Some disciplines, or some journals, just send you the original submission with the author's name on it. Some journals disclose the names of the referees after the paper is accepted, but they would warn you of that. Most journals would publish a thank-you list of all the referees in the past year in the last issue of the year.
Now, some interesting twists. I had a referee from a math department contact me directly with his opinion on my paper that was submitted to a psychology journal. Now, psychology is very tight-lipped, and it was on a boundary of a scandal for the journal. But this seemed to be the standard and natural practice in the home field of the referee. Moreover, on some mathematicians CVs, I have seen not only the papers authored, but also the papers reviewed, so it's the opposite of double-blind.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Generally, reviewers are not supposed to learn the identity of other reviewers for the same submission. As mentioned in the comment by <NAME>, this looks like an error from the journal's side. It could also be the other reviewer's error, if he typed his letter to the editor into the wrong field - but the journal should have checked this before letting other reviewers see it.
In general, I never heard of reviewer names or their letters to the editor being revealed to another reviewer for the same submission. In my field, the letter to the editor is often described as "Confidential comments to the editor", and I always interpreted this as only the editor being allowed to see these comments. It is common though in many publication venues that as a reviewer, you get to see the other reviews for the same submission - but always **after** you submit your review and surely without the reviewers' names being shown.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There is normally no process to inform reviewers of their respective reports. Some journals may relate back the editor verdict based on the reviewers' comments to the reviewers but not even that is commonplace. In journals with an open discussion format (see e.g. Copernicus' journals), reviewers may become aware of each other and certainly read each other's reviews after they have been posted. But, as long as reviewers are allowed to be anonymous, it is unlikely that journals will adopt such an exchange. It does not appear as if electronic submission systems have such structures built-in (not the ones I have been involved with). To keep reviewers unknown to each other and keep their review reports "secret" until the review is done is of course sound since it ensures independent reviews.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I've experienced big differences between mathematics and theoretical computer science, despite the closeness of the two fields and the overlap of the two communities.
In mathematics, papers are normally submitted to journals. (Conferences are useful for many purposes but are not important publication venues.) Journals usually have just a single referee for a paper, but even when a paper has several referees, they don't learn each other's identities nor do they see each other's reports (except in very special cases).
In theoretical computer science, the top conferences are the important publication venues. Papers (or more precisely "extended abstracts" of 12 to 15 pages) are assigned several referees (members of the program committee, who may sub-contract the refereeing job to others if they wish). After submitting a report on a paper, a referee gets access to the names and the reports of the other referees. Members of the program committee who are not assigned to referee a particular paper get (as far as I know) access to the referees' identities and reports as soon as these are entered into the system. (In all the cases I've been involved with, "the system" is the conference management software EasyChair.)
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/15 | 713 | 2,934 | <issue_start>username_0: I have lots of research papers, but can I tell which of them are peer-reviewed. Also, on Google Scholar, is there any way of finding only peer-reviewed articles?<issue_comment>username_1: If the journal is listed by [ISI](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Scientific_Information), it has an impact factor and the chance is high the journal is peer reviewed.
In addition, proprietary search engines like Scopus seem to be more critical to its sources. Google Scholar picks up more, e.g. also the deliverable report I wrote for an EU project, which is not a reviewed paper. Using something like Scopus thus, imo, increases the chance of finding reputable journals. This comes however at a hefty fee, although is probably paid already by the institute.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The cynical answer is that in borderline cases it's impossible to be certain what is peer-reviewed without a lot of investigation. Fraudulent journals claim to be performing peer review, and it's hard to disprove their claims (you have to distinguish between no peer review, incompetent or corrupt peer review, and genuine peer review with a very low requirement for how interesting the papers have to be). Sometimes someone gets a clearly absurd paper accepted (see [SCIgen](http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/) and follow-up projects such as [Mathgen](http://thatsmathematics.com/blog/archives/185)), in which case we know something is terribly wrong. However, there are other cases where we just don't know for sure, even though nobody really trusts the journal. It takes a lot of work to investigate, and there are tons of ridiculous "journals" operating on the web, so nobody has the time or energy to look into every case.
On the other hand, this doesn't come up except with pretty weird journals. Everyone working in a field has a pretty good idea of which organizations and journals are reputable; if an expert doesn't know what to make of a given journal, then that's a bad sign. I don't know of any systematic way to make this judgment other than based on experience and mentoring, although [Beall's list](http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/) is a useful tool to flag highly questionable publishers.
In particular, I know of no automated tool to do searches only for peer-reviewed articles, and I see no prospects for building a reliable tool of this sort (given that some publishers are simply lying).
This makes the situation sound much worse than it is. I've never run across a paper I was even remotely interested in where I had any doubt about its peer review status. However, it's a hard problem if you go dredging through junk journals.
Incidentally, in mathematics it would be a bad idea to limit your reading to peer-reviewed articles. Preprints are not yet peer reviewed, and if you ignore them until they are formally published, you may never catch up to the state of the art.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/02/15 | 936 | 4,069 | <issue_start>username_0: I have finished my PhD and am currently a postdoc. Since receiving my PhD, I have not worked with my PhD advisor. I am planning to apply for jobs for after I finish my postdoc — mostly tenured-track positions.
I am considering not asking my PhD advisor for a letter of recommendation. I feel this might be appropriate because I plan to ask my postdoc advisor to write a letter, because my PhD advisor may not have kept up with my current research, because my coauthors know my work better, and for other reasons.
What are the pros and cons of not having my PhD advisor as a letter writer?<issue_comment>username_1: The only time that you shouldn't ask for a letter of recommendation from your PhD advisor is when you are *not allowed to* ask for one. This is not often the case, but it does arise in a few instances. The best-known one I can think of is that in Germany a *Doktorvater* (supervisor) is not allowed to write a letter of recommendation in support of an applicant whose PhD he supervised.
Other than that, you should have your PhD advisor write a letter; it is expected by just about everyone that the supervisor **will** write a letter, and it will definitely raise questions for you if you do **not** submit such a letter. If there is a particularly compelling reason, then, you should have that well in hand at the time when you are writing your applications. Otherwise, you'll have a lot more explaining to do, and probably a lot of potential postdoc supervisors may not even bother giving your application a second look.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You should ask your supervisor for a letter.
Not having your supervisor write a letter is going to raise red flags. People are going to ask themselves, *why isn't this candidate's thesis supervisor writing a letter?* If you don't have a letter, you need to answer that question. Unless there's a very good reason to not have that letter, I think that it's better to avoid the question altogether. The reasons you've given so far do not seem good enough to me.
You suggested that (1) there may be more appropriate letter writers and that (2) your advisor might not be up-to-date on your current research.
I think these are not good enough reasons to not ask your thesis supervisor to write a letter and I think you can easily address these concerns:
1. You *should also* ask your postdoc supervisor to write you a letter. Not doing so will also raise red flags for similar reasons. If there are other great letter writers, ask them as well. For the tenure-track jobs I applied to, each expected *three or more* letters. There's room for everybody.
You can prioritize the more important or relevant letters. In your cover letter, it is normal to list the names of people writing you letters and it is normal to list those names in the order that you want them to be viewed. You can also specify in the letter which letters reflect more recent relationships, closer collaborations, or relationships closer to the core of your current research efforts.
2. It is not a critical problem if your advisor is not up to date on your current work. Presumably, their letter will talk the work that they know about and about your qualities as a researcher, colleague, and person that will not change. Also, you can point your advisor to or summarize the work you've done more recently.
I provided a copy of a draft cover letter, research statement, and teaching statement to each of my letter writers so that they could see how I was pitching and framing my work. I didn't do this because we were out of touch, but it seems like something similar would help address your concern.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I wanted to reemphasize something that Benjamin said in passing. If they're asking for n letters, they mean at least n letters. So asking your advisor for a letter doesn't mean that you'd need to not ask the other people. Ask your advisor for a letter and ask the other people who know your current work better for letters.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/16 | 1,099 | 4,459 | <issue_start>username_0: ### Background
I was ignorant as an undergraduate and didn't focus heavily in any specific area. I finally graduated with a single math/computer science degree that consisted of 5 math classes beyond multivariable calculus and a few relatively basic computer science classes (algorithm analysis, SQL database design, etc.). My only research experience is in economics.
Now, I work at a research institution in economics where I primarily write Stata/MATLAB code.
### Question
I'd like to get more mathematics under my belt over the next few years in order to either enroll in a PhD program in economics/finance or a M.S. program in finance. What are my options for getting more math experience that I can use in graduate school admissions?
### Options
These are the options I thought of so far, but I would like to know more if possible.
1. Study enough courses through a system like Open CourseWare to gain enough experience to enroll in more advanced undergraduate classes part time, which my employer might pay for, and then ideally move into an M.S. program in applied math.
2. Return to my alma mater for a M.S. degree in math that would at least give me a basis to either move into another math graduate program with higher rankings or a lower-ranked graduate program in the fields of my choice.
3. Join the Air Force and hopefully take advantage of the GI bill to take more courses somewhere and gain entrance into an M.S. program in applied math.
4. (Sadly) Forgo advanced mathematics and find a consulting job, which although unpleasant in the field of economics (in my opinion), wouldn't be difficult to obtain given my research background in the field.
Do I have any other options? I also plan to take the GRE subject test in mathematics to prove that I have at least minimal knowledge, regardless of what course I pursue (since many graduate programs will require it).<issue_comment>username_1: It sounds like your best bet would be to contact the graduate officers at the economics and finance programs you're interested in attending, and ask them what their minimum entrance requirements are. It's a much more efficient route than just deciding to take more math courses, and spending significant time, energy, and money on a quixotic goal.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are several schools that offer a post-baccalaureate or "postbac" program in mathematics. These are typically one-year programs intended for students in precisely your situation: interested in pursuing graduate study, but lacking sufficient preparation from their undergraduate degrees.
Here are the top few I saw when googling "math postbac":
* [Smith College](http://www.math.smith.edu/center/postbac.php) (aimed at women)
* [George Washington University](http://departments.columbian.gwu.edu/math/certificates/postbaccalaureate) (transitioning to a similar "Graduate Certificate Program")
* [Indiana University Kokomo](http://www.iuk.edu/academics/majors/science/graduate-programs/pbc-mathematics/index.shtml)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You could enter a mathematical finance masters or a financial engineering masters. There are also math masters designed for non-math majors, but I would find it hard to enter a straight math masters without a math major.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: In my experience...
I needed a few business classes before I'd qualify to apply for the MBA. So, I simply took a few business classes, after my BS. Then, I had all of the undergrad requirements for the MBA program.
Figure out which advanced degree you want, find out the pre-requisites, and you should be able to take them, either at your undergrad college, where you want to go to grad school, or even somewhere else, or online.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Perhaps you could study for the Math subject GRE and use that to support your admission.
I believe admission into Math Masters programs should be quite possible even for someone without a math major undergraduate background. PhD is possible too but harder.
Math masters (self-funded) usually have lower entry requirements than PhD. So you may want to look in that direction first. Possible route is self-funded Masters --> funded PhD.
Also see [Math Major and Grad School -- Necessary?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9439/math-major-and-grad-school-necessary) which is related to your question.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/16 | 329 | 1,415 | <issue_start>username_0: I've been reading papers authored by professor A's PhD students. I have read about a dozen of papers by now, and realized that all of them are **exactly** 10 pages long. These papers were written by different PhD students and they were published in several different venues (very good ones). Is 10 the magic number for paper-length? (at least in professor A's field, which is computer science - human computer interaction)<issue_comment>username_1: Conference papers often have fairly strict page limits; however, there is no uniform consensus even between different conferences in the same field, and certainly not between fields! For example, one fairly extensive series of conference papers (whose conferences I attend semi-regularly) limits contributions to *six* pages.
Similarly, many journals—such as "letters" journals—have even more severe restrictions (four or five pages), while other journals have (seemingly) no page restrictions at all: I've known papers in both engineering and mathematics journals that have gone for 20, 30, or even 40 pages.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Most American computer science conference papers are precisely 10 pages long, because most ACM conferences have a strict 10-page limit on proceedings papers.
(ACM is the Association for Computing Machinery, the primary professional society for computer science.)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2013/02/16 | 1,341 | 5,522 | <issue_start>username_0: I am thinking of self funding a PhD in Applied Mathematics at either the University of Oxford or Cambridge. Would employers, both for academic (postdoc etc) and industry (research) jobs think less of a PhD holder if he or she is self funded?
E.g. Would they feel that because I failed to secure funding for their PhD, I am inferior to students who did? Although I am planning to self fund to UK schools, it would be nice to hear about views from across the pond (USA) as well.<issue_comment>username_1: There's nothing on your CV that needs to indicate exactly how you were supported during your Ph.D. In fact, if you were self-funded, and managed to get an occasional fellowship or other form of support, that's a plus !
All a recruiting committee should (and does) care about post-PhD is the quality of your work (for faculty positions there are additional issues). No one cares about how you were paid to do that work.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Self-funding alone need not be visible in your applications and is unlikely to hurt in any case. That said, getting outside funding *is* likely to help and you should pursue it if you can.
First, it's not clear how any potential employer would know that you were self funded. Although it's normal to list fellowships or funding that you have received, it's just not normal (in my experience) to list the amount of money you received from a particular fellowship/grant unless it was a very public award.
That said, a list of grants, fellowships, and outside funding will help build a stronger CV. One thing many search committees are looking is a demonstrated ability to bring in grants and funding. Although that can be hard to discern in a graduate student/post-doc, the ability to apply for and get student fellowships can bring a little comfort. Being able to point out in your coverletter that you've thought about grants will inspire a little confidence in your application.
But the standard answer to questions of the form "*does x matter for the job market*" still applies. The quality of your work, your publications, your letters, and many other things will weigh *much* more heavily than the fact that you don't have fellowships that others do.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In *theory* I would say self-funding shouldn't hurt your employment chances, as there's not necessarily a reason to report how you were funded as a PhD student.
That being said, I have found that some people who have an external funding source not tied to a particular project/professor/etc. have two major problems:
1. It's not particularly urgent that you find a project to fund you, which means there's more time spend exploring, "finding yourself", concentrating on classes, etc. This is a double-edged sword - it can slow things down.
2. It's hard for any particular professor to "take ownership" of you - responsible for funding generally comes along with feeling responsible for other things as well, like your aforementioned progress. There's also less pressure to get involved in the early stages of grant writing, since you don't need to worry about it.
Those aren't necessarily reasons not to self-fund, but it's something to consider. None of those will impact *employment* chances, but they can effect your experience in ways that have downstream effects.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: First I have a couple of questions, and suggestions for ways to try to avoid self-funding your PhD:
Do you already have a Masters? If not, it could be a better idea to self-fund a one-year research masters and then try for funding for a PhD after that. That would not leave a 'gap' in your CV, except that probably it's actually too late already to apply for next year.
Have you actually applied anywhere else than Oxford and Cambridge for a PhD? If not, that may be the reason you were unable to obtain funding. There are a lot of other very good universities in the UK (which specific ones are the best will depend on your subject), and doing a PhD with funding at one of those would surely be better than doing one without funding at Oxford or Cambridge.
Or if you were not set on doing your PhD in the UK, you could also choose a country (for example the US or Canada) where PhD students are offered funding as a matter of course.
By the way, if you only applied to Oxford and Cambridge, then Noah Snyder's point, which I think is a good one, doesn't really apply, since it's not the case that you couldn't find anyone willing to fund you, it's just that you didn't try enough possibilities.
It may be possible to apply for funding again once you have already commenced your PhD. I know a few people who self-funded their first year and managed to obtain funding for the rest (these were all in the UK). At least one of them is now a lecturer.
In my opinion you should only try this if you can afford to fund the whole PhD (i.e. *don't* take out a loan for it!), and even then only if you are very passionate about your subject.
Now to my opinion on your actual question:
You needn't mention how your PhD was funded in job applications, but I suppose that in applications for academic jobs in the UK, employers might notice if no funding source is mentioned. I highly doubt this would count against you at all,
as what is really important for your first job after your PhD is the work you have done in your PhD (although an ability to attract funding *is* highly valued in academia!).
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/16 | 2,193 | 9,378 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been hearing different views about my likelihood of getting accepted into a math graduate program.
>
> Which of the following factors contribute most to the acceptance of a **non-math** undergraduate into a math graduate program (please order them)?
>
>
> 1. GPA
> 2. Recommendation letters
> 3. Publishing math papers
>
>
>
---
Since I am an engineering student I only registered basic math courses (such as calculus, linear algebra, etc.). However, I studied a lot of other more advanced courses by myself. My GPA is about 3.5. A lot of people have told me that I need to raise my GPA in order to get accepted into a decent math graduate program and this is worrying me.
Courses that I self-studied: Undergraduate abstract algebra, real analysis (with an introduction to measure theory), first 4 chapters of Munkres' *Topology*, elementary number theory, graph theory
Courses that I am self studying: Hungerford's abstract algebra, algebraic topology
Courses that I plan to study: algebraic geometry, algebraic number theory, complex analysis.
I also managed to finish 2 math papers. So the question is:
Where do I stand now?<issue_comment>username_1: 3,1,2 .
And high GRE (subject) score may help.The content and level of your papers is crucial.
And your goal will determine your chance.By the way ,[this math-gre website](http://www.mathematicsgre.com) lists many applicant profiles and admission results.
Definitely worth a look..
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you are an engineering major who took only the standard math courses, I infer that your overall GPA is driven by your engineering coursework. I don't think that graduate admissions will learn much from your grades in engineering, good or bad. The GPA of 3.5 is not that bad in engineering, especially if (as it seems) your heart was not really in it.
Self-studying is great, but the knowledge acquired from it needs to be evaluated by someone. Acing GRE Math would send a signal that you indeed learned something. If during your studies you kept in touch with math professors in your school, and they know enough about you to write an informed letter full of specifics, that would be even better.
The opinions on undergraduate papers in math are divided: e.g., not everyone considers them a good way to spend time as an undergraduate. I would not expect the admission committees to seriously read papers sent with an application, though they will glance at them.
So, my order is: letters, GRE math, papers, GPA.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I don't see this question as being definitively answerable without a lot more information, both about your background and qualifications and about where you are applying. Grad schools differ enormously in their approach to admissions in unusual cases. Some lower-tier schools are eager to take a chance on smart but nontraditional applicants who will be rejected by more prestigious universities. Others have established rigid rules after having had bad experiences with admitted students who had inadequate backrounds or didn't understand what they were getting themselves into.
Regarding grades, keep in mind that the world has seen a lot of grade inflation, and there are startlingly large numbers of applicants with nearly perfect grades. You generally cannot impress an admissions committee by having excellent grades, although poor grades can hurt your chances. Math departments typically care a lot about grades in mathematics and heavily mathematical fields (e.g., theoretical physics or CS), a little about grades in other scientific or engineering fields, and not at all about other grades, except that exceptionally poor grades in any field suggest the applicant is not good at getting things they don't care about done (which is not a good omen for their career). I.e., math departments don't care if you get a B- in history, but getting an F in history could be a problem.
Recommendation letters are absolutely crucial. In my experience they are by far the most important factor: other aspects of the application could hurt your chances even if you get good letters, but those other aspects cannot get you admitted by themselves. If you can't arrange for enthusiastic letters that the admissions committee will trust, then you have no chance at all of being admitted at a higher-ranked school. It's possible that a lower-ranked school might take a chance on you, but as I understand it every graduate program cares a lot about letters.
As for math papers, it's unfortunately not hard to write a near-vacuous or unoriginal paper and get it published somewhere obscure, and carefully evaluating a paper can take a lot of time and effort (refereeing is hard). If you simply list a paper in your application, with no evidence of its quality, then it's unlikely anyone will have the time to investigate carefully. The important thing for graduate admissions is not the publication per se, but rather the research experience that led to it, and you need a letter of recommendation that talks about this research and vouches for it. (In fact, having such a letter can be very valuable even if the research did not lead to a published paper.) This means you need a letter from your supervisor or mentor, or at the very least from someone who has read the paper and knows something about how it came about (for example, someone who can single out your own contribution if you had coauthors). In principle, if you publish in an especially prestigious journal and without senior coauthors, then the journal's high standards might serve as enough of signal of quality by themselves. However, this very rarely happens with undergraduate research.
So in short:
1. Bad grades could hurt you but good grades won't serve as a strong argument for admission.
2. Recommendation letters are crucial.
3. Research experience could help you get great letters but is very difficult to judge except through the letters.
However, as I said in the beginning, there are a lot of graduate programs out there, with different approaches to admissions. If all goes well, you'll get strong letters from math faculty and will be admitted in more or less the usual way. Otherwise, you may have to find a school that is willing to take a chance (usually because they have trouble attracting strong students with conventional backgrounds).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The earlier answers make good points...
And I would say, in your situation, most likely the "papers" are of little consequence in admission-or-not, and a 3.5 GPA is fine. No one cares beyond that. *Letters* matter a great deal when I recommend-or-not admission. What I read *first*, however, is the personal statement. Do be aware that in many programs there is a dominating impulse to "mechanize" admissions, which obviously has difficulty making use of either letters of recommendation or personal statements. But, still, if you explain your interests, your self-study, this can have a huge, repeat *huge*, impact on admission chances. I suspect you've not had much contact with math faculty in the course of your self-study, so can't get letters from math faculty. (If this is not correct, so much the better!) Letters from engineering faculty about students' mathematical talent are typically nearly worthless, since there seems to be a general tendency for "engineers" to believe that "mathematics" is "just a tool", and that they've mastered it, etc. Nevermind.
But the point is that you should not expect even glowing letters from engineering faculty to have much impact on admission to math grad school, exactly because the prejudices of many engineers are very familiar to mathematicians.
The subject-test GRE may help your chances, and you *must* take it, because a low-ish score is vastly better than the cluelessness indicated by having no score at all.
But for a person approach mathematics with genuine enthusiasm, but "belatedly", the personal statement, explaining unapologetically how you came to your present course, is the most important thing. Very few people choose to self-study mathematics... (although quite a few seem to believe that they have special gifts that require *no* study...!)
Explain yourself in your personal statement. Get letters from the people who think well of you who have the best idea of what professional mathematics entails.
Edit/addition: very literally, it is best to have letters from people who have been to math grad school themselves, preferably at better places, so have an idea of what that entails. Many or most math grad programs have "breadth" requirements apart from the eventual goal of "original research"=thesis. So it's not so much a question of your letter writers' "peer-reviewed publications" so much as their first-hand experience with math grad school. (These days some people who've done PhD's in math do end up in engineering depts, and vice-versa, but this is still unusual.) Thus, a recommendation letter should perhaps literally say something like "From my first-hand experience in math grad school at X, and observations of math grad students at Y and Z, [student] will be a success." That's the kind of thing that leaps out at me when I read these letters. (No, don't have your letter writers send CVs or publication lists.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/17 | 1,043 | 4,500 | <issue_start>username_0: I finished my MS in mathematics 5 years ago. Over these years I have been teaching at a community college (primarily calculus 1,2,3 with analytical geometry and Ordinary Diff. Eqs). When I was in my masters program I was having trouble narrowing my interests and decided to stop at my masters and start teaching. During this time as an instructor I have become very interested in some applied mathematics (biology in particular). I plan to apply to several PhD programs in the near future. With that said, I didn't keep in touch with too many people from the university I attended. I did stay in touch with a couple of my professors (on a minimal basis) and plan to ask them for letters of recommendation.
My questions...
Would a letter of recommendation from my department chair at the community college be of any advantage (and even suffice as 1 of the 3 required)? Or should I call a professor from 5-7 years ago that may remember the grade they gave me? To me the latter seems very generic and I feel my department chair could say more about my dedication to mathematics and teaching.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: I agree, the letter from your current department is likely to be more meaningful than a letter from someone who barely remembers you. The people reading your file will immediately recognize you as a "non-traditional" applicant (i.e., not straight out of undergrad), and will not be surprised that the letters in your file do not follow the pattern of traditional applicants.
While many employer letters are utterly dispensable in graduate admissions, it's a different story when the employer is a math department, "even" at a CC. Chances are that some of your target departments (at least those that combine pure and applied math) are struggling to staff their remedial courses. Slightly cynically speaking, they will be happy to have an instructor with faculty-level experience and TA-level salary (in addition to research prospects).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I was accepted into a number of Computer Engineering PhD programs with recommendations from the following people:
1. My then-current department chair at the high school where I taught physics and computer science.
2. A professor from the graduate education program where I got my Master's degree in teaching.
3. A professor who taught "how to teach physics" courses at another university, where I had been taking a series of the courses in order to become a better physics teacher.
I would have loved to get recommendation letters from professors from my undergraduate engineering curriculum, but my degree was from 15 years prior, and no one would have remembered me, nor been able to write anything substantial.
The letters I did get gave detailed information about my work performance from a teaching perspective for technical classes, and from a learning perspective in (somewhat) technically-minded classes.
Bottom line: get letters from people who can comment on your ability to do research, if possible, but more importantly from people who know you well and can add information to help a committee decide on whether or not to accept you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As a "non-traditional applicant," you will be evaluated more on your work experience, and less on your coursework than most. So a letter from your department chair where you teach would be very helpful.
Fortunately, your work experience is very germane to your graduate study aspirations. I (and most others) can see how an interest in "applied mathematics (biology in particular)" grew out your your teaching calculus, analytic geometry, and differential equations. (And there's the old saying, "those that don't want to practice, teach. Those that don't want to teach, do research.")
Even in a research-oriented graduate program, teaching ability is a "tiebreaker." In your case, with your heavy experience, a potential "deal maker." Graduate students are expected to do research first, but teaching, second. You already offer the teaching "bird in hand," and if someone has doubts about your academic background, the likely thinking is that since you can teach this stuff, you're not likely to be bad.
While research earns the advancement, teaching "earns your keep." You may take particular interest in programs where there are tenured associate professors, people who can't get promoted to full professor based on research, but get tenure based on teaching ability.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/17 | 256 | 1,025 | <issue_start>username_0: I received this comment from a reviewer: *“ It is better to add a nomenclature section with a list of all the used symbols and their meaning as example (DVB-T, DVB-S2, BCH, OSFBC, LDPC...), consequently the paper should be re-arranged eliminating all the definitions given in the sections”*.
**Are there any specific position for this section ?**<issue_comment>username_1: If you add such a section, it would need to be directly after the abstract. This way, any nomenclature is explained before it is used in the main text.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The correct position for a nomenclature section is the location normally used by the journal in question. While as Paul suggests, the logical location for this should be at the *start* of the paper, in many journals, the nomenclature section is placed at the *end*, largely because it does not "look as good" to have the nomenclature section right on the first page (which is optically the "prime real estate" of the paper).
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/17 | 624 | 2,726 | <issue_start>username_0: Do community colleges have good mathematics libraries (with advanced books)? I am sure that it is different from place to place. I am interested to get some feeling of the general situation.<issue_comment>username_1: Of course, as <NAME> says, every institution is different. However, in general I would expect the answer is **no**.
Community colleges typically offer only lower-division courses and don't expect their students or faculty to carry on research. Moreover, they are usually publicly funded and charge only nominal tuition, so they are not likely to have a lot of extra money. Given this, it's difficult to see why a community college librarian would want to spend money acquiring advanced mathematics books or journals.
That said, a community college library would almost certainly have access to the interlibrary loan network, allowing one to (eventually) acquire any resource of interest. Some might also have a reciprocity agreement with a nearby research university library. It is also quite possible they would have access to online databases that could include a lot of material in mathematics.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I fully agree with username_1's answer, but here are some resources for exploring what sorts of mathematics books you might find at primarily undergraduate institutions:
If there are specific community colleges you are thinking of applying to, you can look for an online library catalog, or visit the library in person and check it out. This is by far the most reliable way to tell whether you would be happy with the library.
The Mathematical Association of America provides a [basic library list](http://mathdl.maa.org/mathDL/19/?nodeId=959) of books recommended for undergraduate libraries, annotated with how essential they feel the book is. Decades ago the list had two-year and four-year sections, but nowadays it is probably aimed more at four-year colleges. Still, it will give an upper bound for what one can reasonably expect of a typical community college. You won't find research monographs on the list.
The American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges apparently had a similar list, at least as of 1993 when [these guidelines](http://www.amatyc.org/documents/Guidelines-Position/GuidelinesforMathDept.htm) were written (see D.1), but I cannot find it online. You could probably learn more by asking them.
Of course, underfunded institutions may lack even the most essential books on the basic library list, while fancy schools may have all of them and more. Note that while there are some pretty fancy liberal arts colleges out there, you don't generally run across community colleges with big budgets.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/17 | 772 | 3,305 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in my second year as an Associate Professor (with tenure) at a top research university (listed among top 20 in *US News & World Report* in my field). My publication, teaching, and service records are all very good to excellent. I have also received numerous awards such as Sloan Fellowship and NSF's Career Award. In general, I am happy with my current institution, but sometime wonder if I can move to more prestigious university. There are other personal reasons as well that makes me ponder about such possibility. Would it be a good idea to apply other universities for someone at this stage of their career? How do search committees feel about hiring someone who has a tenure?<issue_comment>username_1: "Poaching"—"stealing" a tenured faculty away from one department to another by offering a more lucrative package—happens in academia with some frequency.
Obviously, if the position you're interested in applying for is a tenured position, then there might be a chance that the search committee will consider already-tenured candidates for the position. However, it is not a guarantee that this will be the case. (It depends a lot upon the candidate and the relative "fit." Also, a candidate who is fairly close to retirement may not be at the top of their priority list—simply because that means the search may have to be repeated in a few years anyways!)
One other thing to keep in mind—the working relationship you have with your *current* faculty may be significantly strained if you handle this the wrong way. You may want to see what you can find out on a confidential basis *before* committing to applying for positions. Once you've sent it out, it's out there—and could cause problems for you if word gets back to your present department.
You may therefore want to have a discussion with your department chair, but I would strongly recommend **not** using "these schools are more prestigious" as a reason for applying to them. If that's the only reason you're doing it, then you may want to reconsider, as switching schools is a time-consuming and nontrivial process.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It's rare that a search to fill a tenured position proceeds along the usual lines (post an ad, interview candidates, make an offer). Because of the delicacy involved in poaching, it's usually a lot more "under the radar". Which is to say that if someone hasn't approached you yet, they might not be interested in what you have to offer.
Having said that, one strategy (if you're really interested in moving) is to drop hints in the right places with the right people. Contrary to what username_1 says, I'd argue that "moving to a much higher ranked place" is probably the ONLY reason to move that won't create hard feelings (in that people usually can understand the desire to move up the rankings). Even then, the shift should be significant, else moving between universities that are similarly ranked doesn't make a lot of sense unless you have other reasons (geographic, two-body, etc).
I realized I didn't answer the question in the title. The short answer is: it's very hard, but not impossible. It depends much less on the availability of positions in general, and much more on the specific match between the institution and you.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/02/17 | 1,282 | 4,772 | <issue_start>username_0: When a US institution that manages grant programs (such as NSF) suddenly sees its funding cut, as will be the case after the US sequester takes effect in March, **how long does it take for that cut to trickle down onto grant programs and grants?**
Namely: **Can grants already started get cut** (like, they tell you you'll lose 20% funding for the last year)? What about **grant programs where the selection was already announced**, can they make changes to that? Or will it “merely” impact the number of grants they can fund from now on?
*(I know that the government will move, and though the situation is stupid, it's not as much of a dead-end as it is pictured… this question assumes that the sequester goes in effect, and not deal is made to lessen its impact.)*
---
This question was spurred by today's [PhD Comics](http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php):
[](http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1561)<issue_comment>username_1: See the NIH answer below on what's happening to grant budgets, at least for their agencies. It sounds like there is some budget trimming for the amount awarded for new grants, but they're trying to mitigate that somewhat. Where I think there's going to be a much greater impact is with *new* awards - with less money, and not wanting to hamstring grants with further cuts, they're simply likely to make less awards.
As for how much time before the possible effect of the sequester hits? It already has. Several people I've spoken to who do program planning, grants work, etc. for the Federal government have expressed the feeling that, because of the level of uncertainty about what money they'll have in the future, funding agencies are being very conservative about what they commit to spending. We could see this in the last budget cycle and the near shut-down - funding slowed to a crawl for a bit, and then when the continuing resolution got passed, there was a small "bump" as agencies spent out money they hadn't yet promised "just in case".
So if the sequester goes through, what that will really do is make those conservative, "We better not spend $$$ until we know we'll have it" plans a reality, followed by more severe paylines etc. in the next grant cycle.
So worst case: It's already here, we're just not committed to it yet.
Best case: The next funding cycle.
Edit: The actual answer has come from the NIH:
<http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-13-043.html>
>
> The NIH continues to operate under a Continuing Resolution as
> described in NOT-OD-13-002, and therefore all non-competing
> continuation awards are currently being funded at a level below that
> indicated on the most recent Notice of Award (generally up to 90% of
> the previously committed level). Final levels of FY 2013 funding may
> be reduced by a sequestration. Despite the potential for reduced
> funding, the NIH remains committed to our mission to seek fundamental
> knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the
> application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and
> reduce the burdens of illness and disability.
>
>
> Should a sequestration occur, NIH likely will reduce the final FY 2013
> funding levels of non-competing continuation grants and expects to
> make fewer competing awards to allow the agency to meet the available
> budget allocation. Although each NIH Institute and Center (IC) will
> assess allocations within their portfolio to maximize the scientific
> impact, non-competing continuation awards that have already been made
> may be restored above the current level as described in NOT-OD-13-002
> but likely will not reach the full FY 2013 commitment level described
> in the Notice of Award. Finally, in the event of a sequestration, NIH
> ICs will announce their respective approaches to meeting the new
> budget level.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Okay, I read today in *Chemical & Engineering News* an [article](http://cen.acs.org/articles/91/i8/Spending-Cuts-Set-Kick.html) that gives good, fact-based information on the issue. It seems to indicate that **already accepted grants would be cut down**, not only current and future proposals:
>
> At the National Institutes of Health, for example, sequestration is expected to cut $1.5 billion of its funding for 2013. The cuts would amount to a 5.1% reduction for each of the agency’s 27 institutes and centers. “That translates into hundreds of grants that would have been funded in this fiscal year that simply won’t get paid,” says NIH Director <NAME>. As a result, several thousand research positions could be eliminated.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/18 | 3,560 | 14,952 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a first year master student currently taking courses on the second semester. For the most part I did pretty good on the first semester except that I got behind in one course which is specially demanding and hard.
Now I'm taking the equivalent amount of work as before plus I'm trying to finish my assignments for the other class in order to get my grade. And I'm also collaborating in a research project which I wasn't doing last semester.
I'm having a hard time trying to manage my time in order to accomplish everything. As I don't want to get behind in another course I try to be on top of what I'm seeing in class. However I find that this consumes a lot more time than I expected and I never accomplish the goals I set for the day.
As an example, if I have some class the next day I try to really understand everything we saw the previous meeting, and by the time I manage to do that (if I do), there is only about 3 hours left to do everything else. In a normal day I expend all the time doing my "academic stuff" and I only stop for eating and sleeping. Where the sleeping time could vary from 0 to 6 hours depending if I feel I'm getting too far behind or if I managed to finish all I wanted for that day (rare). I have to admit that I always try to get the most miniscule detail and expend a great deal of time thinking how to go from point A to point B on the text which in some sense is a pedantic attitude. However, I find that if I don't do this, then the ideas are very shaky (there are holes in my understanding) and I tend to forget those very easily, which is not good for doing exercises or taking an exam.
I have tried to split the day in blocks and only expend a fixed amount of time doing an specific task. However, this way I feel I go so slow that I'm not accomplishing anything. So basically what I end up doing is working nonstop in one task (which can take more than one day) and then try to compensate for the other tasks I didn't do by cutting sleeping time or further delaying other work.
I sometimes think that if I'm working that hard at this level, I have no chance of getting a PhD or continuing in academia. I see that some of my peers have time to have fun, go out and still get good grades while I barely have time to enjoy a meal. I also get good grades (I have to in order to keep my scholarship) but I feel that the effort I'm putting is too much for the reward (not exceptionally good grades).<issue_comment>username_1: One of the biggest challenges in any professional career is mastering time management. It's a tough assignment—and in recent years has become even tougher.
The most important thing to realize is that there is **never** enough time to do everything you want to do perfectly, unless you tackle a very small number of things in aggregate. For instance, if you are a professor, your list of tasks probably includes some combination of:
* Supervising research of your students
* Teaching classes
* Performing committee work
* Writing grant applications
* Networking with colleagues
* Writing, revising, and reviewing papers
And there may be a whole host of other administrative duties that eat up a lot of time, but don't otherwise help you get things done. Unfortunately, the day is currently limited to 24 hours [1], and you still have to figure out how to do all the other tasks of daily living (eating, sleeping, exercising), and having some semblance of a social life as well (so that other people know you're still alive!).
You can do many things well; the trick is to realize that you can't do *everything* perfectly. After a certain amount of time invested in working on something, you will hit the *point of diminishing returns*: an additional unit of time spent will yield a smaller incremental gain than the preceding unit. That's the point at which you should start moving on to other activities. It can be frustrating to have to stop working on something (it's certainly intellectually unsatisfying!), but it's the only real way to get everything you need done.
One other thing to think about: most of your tasks (in academia, at least) are known somewhat in advance: classes have an established duration, papers are in progress for a while, meetings with multiple groups do not happen at the drop of a hat. Thus, you may be able to at least get a rough schedule for your week planned at the start (or at the end of the previous week). Leave yourself a few blocks of time that aren't completely scheduled, and schedule a block of "personal time" (whatever you choose to do with that that helps you to "recharge your batteries," or get in touch with your inner self, or however else you relax).
[1] Days *will* get longer eventually, thanks to the slowing down of the earth's rotation, but not quickly enough to help us out!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I want to give you one piece of advice which I think is very important: Sleep more.
If you don't get enough sleep, your brain won't work as well and so it will take you longer to understand things. You will be able to work much more efficiently with enough sleep. Also, your brain does a lot of important work during sleep, helping reinforce connections made during the day etc. So the time spent sleeping is not at all a 'waste of time' as far as your study is concerned.
Try not to view sleep as something optional that you can leave out if you don't have time. Have a go at sleeping at least six hours *every* night for a couple of weeks (I need at least eight most nights, myself, but six would be a good start at least) and see if you feel a lot more on top of things after that!
In my Honours year I found that it was hard to get to sleep if I had been doing maths within the last two hours before going to bed, so I made a rule that I had to stop doing maths at 10pm every night. I mostly stuck to it, and it worked very well.
Also, I'd like to offer some encouragement that having to work this hard now doesn't mean you couldn't do a PhD or continue in academia if you wanted to. I am now doing my second postdoc, and have never worked as hard as I did in my Honours year (that's like the first year of a two-year Masters).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: * Seek contact to other people that work on the same tasks or have solved similar tasks before. An active communication about what you are working on can be a lot of fun, can accelarate learning and productivity a lot, and open a bunch of new chances.
* Do your best at the moment, don't worry about lost time or chances, since the only time where you can act and use real chances is now. Learn from the past and focus on the future, but don't get obsessed with analysing and planning. The mind set of 'now is the moment' can be both relaxing and motivating.
* Do some time management. Instead of focusing on tools and life-hacks, I would recommend to focus on the following principles:
+ Get a long term perspective (meaning: picture your own funeral) what you want to achieve in life. Your intermediate goals should have some connection to your long-term goal.
+ Prioritize your activities and goals. Priorization should be dependent only on YOUR goals, not what someone else wants to make you believe is important.
+ Reserve a lot of time to socializing, because most goals you cannot achieve without the interaction with others.
+ Don't exploit yourself, don't ignore your needs. Reserve enough free time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: In general, I've found that awareness is a key part of time management. Here are some tips that can help:
1. Take the time over a week or two to really log exactly where your time is going, what you're doing, and how long it's taking. While sometimes it is the case that you're working at 100%, often there are snippets of time here and there that you could be using more effectively. It can be difficult to adjust how you're managing your time until you really understand where your time is going. As an example, I know a guy who says he works at least 16 hours a day, but after working in the same room as him I came to realize that it can take him 4 hours to write one paragraph because he is constantly getting distracted with browsing the web, answering his phone, replying to e-mail, and talking to other people. While he is technically "working" the whole time, it makes it easy to understand how he's always missing deadlines and complaining that he doesn't have enough time in a day.
2. Based on that log, look at what is taking the most time and think about why. For example, maybe it turns out that you spend 120 minutes a day answering e-mails. If you notice trends, consider whether there's anything that you can do to decrease that time or spend that time more efficiently. In the example, maybe you could designate "e-mail time" at two points during the day to aggregate your work in it rather than constantly checking and being interrupted.
3. Brainstorm other resources that might help you to reduce some of the larger blocks of time. For example, if you're spending a ton of time trying to understand your classwork, can you form a study group that's a set amount of time and perhaps cover the material faster? Are there on-campus resources to help with difficult concepts such as tutoring?
4. At the beginning of each week, start a prioritized to-do list to manage what really needs to get done and what it would be nice to get done. As others have said, it's normal to have too many things to do and not enough time. However, you can definitely order your time so that the things that need to get done, get done. Don't be surprised or shocked if you always have carryover for the next week. There are some great online tools for this such as [teuxdeux](http://teuxdeux.com/) and [Trello](https://trello.com/). These tools can also help you track what you've accomplished each week. Sometimes it's easy to think that you haven't gotten anywhere but I find that an archive of the things that I've finished can help to dispel that impression.
5. Lay out what your ideal schedule would be like. Make sure to prioritize blocking out time to sleep (you work more efficiently if you've had some) and time to eat. You don't need to go overboard on these and there will be times where you'll have to skimp on them, but you should have a baseline to aim for.
6. Last, learn to know when your schedule is blown and set a goal or deadline for when you will get back on track. Sometimes you have a deadline that makes it impossible to get enough sleep and you need to put in 110%. This is normal, but you also need to have a plan/date for ratcheting the workload back down to manageable levels or you will burn out. Once you've burned out, it can be very difficult to get back on track, so don't think that you can just keep working at maximum levels.
As an added note, when I first started graduate school a senior professor told me, "Done is better than perfect." Sometimes this really helps me to figure out what's a priority.
Hang in there and I hope that helps!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: It sounds like your primary issue is not as much **"I don't have time to finish what I *need* to do."** as **"I don't have time to finish what I *want* to do."**
Combined from your original post and your comments this is what you currently are undertaking:
* Normal current course load for your program.
* Catch up from last semester's *exceptional* class.
* Research project.
* Additional research (expanded syllabuses) on your normal course work.
With your additional research, you are adding extra work for yourself on top of what your peers are doing and then wondering why you don't have time to finish what you *need* to do.
That you have the interest to dig deeper is wonderful thing, but it seems you are getting carried away, and you may not see any long term benefit for your efforts.
>
> Unfortunately this doesn't usually get reflected on the grades but I
> feel that in the future (when doing research) I won't waste too much
> time trying to understand the fundamentals.
>
>
>
While this *may* be true, in the short term you are killing yourself. I say *may* because by this supposed point in the future, through the normal *expected* course work for your program, you might find yourself with the same level of expertise. Unless this extra work is done under some guidance, it seems highly unlikely you are choosing the best sources for your research. Worse, you may also be spending all your extra hours mastering some techniques that are *even now* obsolete by the state of the art but are taught as stepping stones for future topics.
Really, why are you are doing something that is ***not*** reflected in your current grades at the cost of something that ***is*** reflected in your current grades? Your grades are Academic currency as you said yourself you need them to keep your scholarship.
You mention your peers discuss problems that give them trouble or would ask the the professor or course assistant for help. How often do you? There is limited class time so some things don't get full treatment, or they have to choose the manner a topic is presented out of many options, one of the other options may make a troublesome topic just click for you.
If you continue with the extra research. Discuss it with your professors, they should be able offer advice as to what is worth exploring, what is a waste of your time, and what would be better left for a future point in your studies. For what is worth your time, they'll be able to point you in the direction of the best resources to use. Discussing with them will also make them aware of the extra work you are doing which cannot hurt.
>
> I see that some of my peers have time to have fun, go out and still
> get good grades while I barely have time to enjoy a meal. I also get
> good grades
>
>
>
It may very well be that they see better outcomes for the time spent because they take time to enjoy themselves.
* As others have pointed out, we need an appropriate amount of physical rest to be at our best.
* We also often need time for things to soak in mentally.
* Long term retention works best with many short study sessions.
* Relentlessly cramming on the same subject without break until you master it is almost never the most efficient way to learn.
Mental focus is a finite resource. It can be divided between foreground (conscious) and background (sub-conscious) processes. Both are required to learn. If you work relentlessly, you don't give the background processes a chance to do their part.
By taking time to have fun, they give themselves time for it to settle, for their brains to run those background processes. They give themselves a chance for the 'Ahh Ha!' moment where it all falls into place.
For myself, most 'Ahh Ha!' moments came away from the books, away from actively working on the related topic.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/18 | 814 | 3,289 | <issue_start>username_0: I will try to describe my situation briefly.
The university I'm currently studying at offers a 4-year Bachelor program in mathematics.
I am currently in my 3rd year and the program for the 4th year consists only of optional courses (which I choose). As I have taken a rather high amount of optional courses so far, I can satisfy my ECTS requirements for the whole program in 3 years. The university, in this situation, would allow me to graduate at the end of my third year. Then, I could pursue an MSc. degree at the same university for a year and graduate with an MSc at the end of my 4th year of study in the university.
I would like to note that this has been done before by other students here and I'm not fantasizing.
My intention is to apply for a PhD at a university in the USA after the 4th year. (I am not a US citizen and I haven't studied there).
My question is: would getting an earlier BSc and MSc degree affect (negatively or positively) my chances for admission in a top university in the USA?
Should I just graduate with a BSc. in math?
I know that sometimes having a MSc. from the same university can be a negative sign. Should I be worried about that?
Some other background:
My current university is not really "elite" of any sort; it barely enters the top 600 in the world. I have a few published articles and I have participated in conferences. I am also currently pursuing an internship in a research institute in the country.
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: One issue to keep in mind is that in the US, the PhD program includes the coursework phase associated with the Master's degrees in Europe.
While this wouldn't be a negative factor in your admission, you may or am not be able to get a waiver for the coursework phase, even with a Master's already in hand. In some cases, they'll let you place out of courses, in others, they might not. Therefore, you should contact the individual schools you want to apply to and inquire about their policies.
However a Master's degree will help you if you do well; if you struggle, it probably won't be of much benefit at all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: (I'm on the admissions committee of a top-10 US computer science department; my advice may be way off base for mathematics PhD programs.)
**All else being equal, getting a master's degree in one year would probably count *against* you.** You're far better off taking some graduate-level courses, and possibly getting some research experience, while staying in the BSc progam.
At least in my department, PhD applicants who already have master's degrees are held to a significantly higher standard than applicants who only have bachelor's degrees. While having formal research experience is an *advantage* for undergraduate applicants, it's a de facto *requirement* for applicants with an master's degree. One year is not a lot of time to get some real (meaning publishable) research experience, especially since most one-year master's programs have heavy coursework requirements. And you'll be competing with other MS applicants who've already spent two years in graduate school.
My department steers PhD-oriented undergraduates *away* from our 5-year BS/MS program for this precise reason.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/02/19 | 342 | 1,243 | <issue_start>username_0: APA Format: When writing the name of a program I used in a study (MyFriendQuest) do I need to italicise the name or add a trademark sign? I am not sure how to stylise the name of the program or if I even need to.<issue_comment>username_1: I have to cite my online university references in APA, and know that the journal article/book title has to be in italics, to make it stand out. I'm not as sure about a program like this, though it could be in my 15-odd page style guide I have to use.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: According to Section 7.08 (page 210) of the 6th edition of the Publication Manual of the APA,
>
> Do not italicize the names of software, programs, or languages.
>
>
>
Furthermore,
>
> Reference entries are not necessary for standard software and programming languages, such as Microsoft Word or Excel, Java, Adobe Photoshop, and even SAS and SPSS. In text, give the proper name of the software, along with the version number. Do provide reference entries for specialized software or computer programs with limited distribution.
>
>
>
An example of a reference entry:
>
> Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 2) [Computer software]. Englewood, NJ: Biostat.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/19 | 1,935 | 6,946 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing a report and I have been compiling a list of references (from IEEE mostly) and I also have a number of websites.
>
> My question is, what is the best way to note a website URL? Would it be to reference and cite a URL, would it be adding a footnote? An example would be a reference to google.com. Would it be the correct to just create a footnote?
>
>
>
I've started to just add a footnote each time a website is mentioned (using LaTeX) so for example if a javascript plugin is mentioned then a footnote would be added to the website URL. How would be best to do this as it would not suffice as a reference as it is just noting a website for further reading. I do not have time to waste be writing the whole report to then have to go back through and edit the document hence my question.<issue_comment>username_1: I suppose the easiest way would be to use the `\newcommand` command in LaTeX.
Put something like this before your `\begin{document}`:
```
\newcommand{\jquerynote}{\footnote{\url{http://jquery.com}}~}
```
Use it as follows.
```
We used JQuery\jquerynote to build the user interface.
```
If you want to change the reference to a citation or another format, you can replace the contents of the `\newcommand`
As far as to "What is the best way to cite a website URL?" the answer generally is that there isn't a standard. Personally, I use web sites as a citation if it contributes some kind of important intellectual argument to the paper. If I use web sites as a footnote, it's because it has to do with some kind of tool I used and is there simply to inform the user that I used Tool XYZ.
Using your example, if I said in my paper, "We used the Google search engine to identify evidence of bias in search engine results" I'd probably put that as a footnote, whereas if I said, "Company web sites from Google, Microsoft, and Apple about employment all state that having fun at work is important" may be citations.
(I should finally note that this is a personal convention rather than anything spelled out in a styleguide, but maybe it helps you?).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't use footnotes because they are disruptive. Also this may lead to an abundance of repetition in your document, with the same footnote appearing over and over again.
Instead, I suggest you treat URLs as normal references.
The `biblatex` packages provides support for URL references. Another advantage of using the package is that it lets you create a separate bibliography for the URLs. This is not explained here.
The package supports values for `url`, `date`, and `urldate` keys in your BibTeX database.
* `url` describes the URL.
* `date` describes the official date.
* `urldate` describes the date you visited/retrieved the URL.
The package also lets you customise the text in the bibliography that precedes the value for `urldate`. For example, you can set it to `Visited` or `Retrieved`. Customising the string is done by setting the *bibliography string* `urlseen`.
The following is based on an example from [<NAME>](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/51079/add-retrieved-last-accessed-or-similar-information-to-authoryear-in-biblate). It shows the basic mechanism. Save it, run LateX on it, then `bibtex`, and LaTeX.
```
\documentclass{article}
\RequirePackage[style=authoryear,
useprefix=true,
backend=bibtex,
block=space,
language=british]{biblatex}
\renewcommand*{\bibopenparen}{[}
\renewcommand*{\bibcloseparen}{]}
\renewcommand*{\finalandcomma}{,}
\renewcommand*{\finalnamedelim}{, and~}
% 3em recommended by Bringhurst, p 80.
\renewcommand*\bibnamedash{\rule[0.48ex]{3em}{0.14ex}\space}
\usepackage{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{\jobname.bib}
@Online{ctan,
label = {CTAN},
title = {CTAN},
subtitle = {The Comprehensive TeX Archive Network},
date = {2006},
url = {http://www.ctan.org},
urldate = {2012-04-07},
}
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{\jobname.bib}
\DefineBibliographyStrings{english}{%
urlseen = {Retrieved},
}
\begin{document}
I always get my {\LaTeX} packages from
the Comprehensive {\TeX} Archive Network~\parencite{ctan}.
\printbibliography
\end{document}
```
The `\parencite` command is for parenthetical citations. (`biblatex` also provides other kinds of citation commands.) The `filecontent` related stuff makes the example a standalone example (so you won't have to create the BibTeX file). The command is not recommended for day-to-day LaTeX.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Echoing the comments and other answers, citing a website is no different to citing any other resource, such as a book, or a paper. Depending on your favorite text editor and reference manager, you would like to produce bibliographic entries, such as
>
> ... for the implementation of the prototype, we used the *Ruby* programming language [23] and ...
>
> ...
>
> ...
>
> **Bibliography**
>
> ...
>
> 23. Matsumoto, Yukihiro. *Ruby Programming Language*. `http://www.ruby-lang.org/`, 2009.
>
>
>
In BibTeX, there's @misc entry for that. You would use it as follows:
```
@misc{links/Java,
author = {{Sun Microsystems Inc.}},
title = {{J}ava{\texttrademark} {P}latform, {S}tandard {E}dition 6},
howpublished={\url{http://java.sun.com/}},
month{jun},
year = {2006}
}
@misc{links/xml,
author = {{W3C}},
title = {{Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0}},
howpublished = {\url{http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/}},
publisher = {World Wide Web Consortium},
year = {2008},
month = {November}
}
```
Since websites are a dynamic resource, you should always include the date (year/month) of the last retrieval.
For the url, the code above would assume `\usepackage{url}`.
Another technical issue with this is whether your chosen bibliography style would include the URL in the reference, or not. You might want to consult [this questions at tex.SE](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/36248/url-of-cited-web-site-in-bibliography)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are using BibTeX to maintain your bibliography, you might want to use the [IEEEtran](http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/IEEEtran/bibtex/) bibliography style, which takes care of the *url* field in the BibTeX entries by adding an [Online] tag in the bibliography followed by the given url.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Given that web content disappears, you could cite the Internet Archive URL, e.g., <https://web.archive.org/web/19981111184551/http://google.com/> rather than <http://google.com/> (I bet you can't remember Google looking like that!) This also ensures that the content you cite is the content your readers see.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/19 | 540 | 2,344 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently, some of the reviews I received mentioned their decision at the end of the review (i.e. 'I recommend acceptance of the paper'), while others do not have such statements.
What is the point of adding the decision statement while the overall evaluation (i.e. on EasyChair system) explicitly says it? Is it just the reviewer's habit?<issue_comment>username_1: Typically I include an explicit recommendation in the report to be shared with the authors when I have a strong opinion, but not necessarily otherwise. In the former case, the editor can still decide either way (referees make recommendations, not decisions), but if they disagree with me at least the authors will know for sure what the referee thought.
>
> what is the point of adding the decision statement while the overall evaluation (i.e. on EasyChair system) explicitly says it? is it just the reviewer habit?
>
>
>
It may be habit, and it may reflect uncertainty about what information from the web form will be available to the authors.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The only reason I can think of to include a outright recommendation the authors can see is if the "feel" of my comments and the decision don't necessarily align naturally. For example, if I've issued a lot of criticisms, but most of those are "With fine tuning, this would be an outstanding paper", or hoping to see what is an adequate treatment of really spectacular data turn into a great treatment, I might not that despite the page of suggestions, it could probably fly as is.
At the same time, I've reviewed a paper with a very small number of comments, but in those comments have been tempted to use words like 'fatally flawed'. So including a 'I would reject this paper' comment might help with "There are only three things you need to change, but you need to take them seriously."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: As far as I can see there are two main reasons:
* The editor usually isn't an expert in every area. Adding an explicit recommendation (accept, reject, ...) may help the editor.
* An explicit recommendation (accept, reject, ...) is the reviewer's ultimate summary. The reviewer should only provide it if they can defend it and feel it's fair. In that sense adding the recommendation strengthens the review.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/20 | 1,923 | 7,987 | <issue_start>username_0: I just finished an MBA in the UK. It included a research dissertation (about 18,000 words) and a research methods module and adviser to go with it. However, my adviser made it clear during my research that it was my project and my responsibility and not his. It was clear that he was happy to mark my dissertation but didn't want to be bothered by actually helping me to learn much about research.
In the end, I did the research on my own and got distinction on the paper, which I was happy about. However, now I'm thinking more and more about pursuing a PhD, perhaps in intercultural management, and I feel like a highly respectable school would not consider me because I do not have much research experience.
So, my question is: What can I do to gain research experience, now that I've finished my MBA, with an eye towards getting into a good school for a PhD?
As I have read, publications will help a lot but I feel like I don't have the experience to do the kind of research to get into a good publications. I really think I need to build my research skills...and would like to know how to do that.
Another related problems is when doing business research (I get the feeling most people here are from the science/math side of academia) is gaining access to companies (to gather data) and I'm not sure how to do that without an adviser.
I have read [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1136/how-can-i-improve-my-research-experience-for-phd-application), [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5522/what-is-a-good-research-experience), and [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7780/what-are-the-key-points-in-short-descriptions-of-research-experience) question but I think my question is different from each of them.<issue_comment>username_1: This is not an immediately short term solution and would require some time:
Try to get in touch with a professor who does what you like to do for your Phd. Like here clearly explain your situation. If you get a response continue the discussion, you might be offered to go and visit the lab or if after a couple of exchanges you feel it’s the right time offer to go and see them.
Try to see if you can do some work for them part-time. If they say day don’t have money etc. if you can offer a day or two of part-time unpaid if it works for you from home/weekend etc. If you get lucky they might offer you paid work if they get money later. From the beginning discuss publications and research experience and hopefully over time you can get a paper or two under your belt and get recommendation letter as well.
Who knows they might offer you a Phd position after some time as well if you work well together. We have done this before and in fact this happens a lot. Someone with a master does some paid or unpaid work and if we are happy with him or her and money comes in later we will get in touch and ask if they are interested. Now that I think about it is quite common with many of the PhD students we have.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I am only familiar with the UK system, but here are some points about getting research experience in the UK.
**1) Find a supervisor for your PhD.**
A lot of UK departments prefer to admit PhD students who has found a faculty member who is willing to supervise and has a research proposal written together with that member. If doing a PhD in the UK is part of your goal, you could start by looking at departments/people you want to work with and contact them as a prospective student.
Some patience is required as they might not be looking to supervise a student at the moment. But I have found that most are willing to give prospective students a research project to work on before admissions or while working on the proposal. In fact, all those who were willing to supervise me ended up offering me a research project.
**2) "Cold calling" for projects.**
You might find that some professors, lecturers, postdocs or research fellows etc are very happy to have students with the experience to work on their projects. You can try emailing people with a very short version of your academic CV, asking for research opportunities. I have successfully gotten projects this way too.
**3) Official Internships/Studentships.**
Some UK universities have official internships or studentships for someone to work on a research project for 3-6 months. These may not be advertised so you need to do point 1) and 2) or simply ask. I have successfully gotten these before and they were willing to at least help pay the rent (400-500 pounds I think) or given you a token sum. I cannot be more precise about the pay because I turned down the payment in order to keep my part time job. Do note that getting paid or being in an official position will come with the requirement/expectation that you report to work daily and stay in the office for some minimum number of hours.
**4) General advice.**
Academics are incredibly busy people, especially famous tenured professors. Also, they might have a steady stream of students to work with. I think I was quite lucky to get around 30-40% respond rate when emailing people asking for research experience. Most of them are because I am asking as a prospective student. So please do not be too disappointed that people don't get back to you. And don't spend all your time trying to get just 1-2 famous faculty to give you research opportunities.
You should be prepared to travel and meet them, paying for all the travel fees yourself. You should also not talk about reimbursement/payment first. In my humble opinion, you need to be prepared to work on a project for free, making it clear that you want the experience on your CV and a possible paper. Then, they might arrange for payment for you. It is your responsibility to show that you are serious and trustworthy and not a waste of their precious time.
I think it helps a lot (with regards to funding) if you are from the EU as funding in the UK is usually restricted to EU citizens.
I hope this helps.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> I feel like a highly respectable school would not consider me because
> I do not have much research experience
>
>
>
In terms of research experience, there is a big difference between much and none. Most grad schools I know of are wary of applicants with no research experience, but do not go so far as to require "much". Yes, more is generally better, but some is often enough. I would generally classify an MBA with a research dissertation as being enough to be considered, especially one awarded distinction.
The best way to get more experience is to volunteer in a research group. Most research groups need someone to do data entry/analysis and general lackey work. You need to be prepared to enter as low man on the totem pole and do some boring tasks to get access to better tasks. Even boring and menial tasks in a research group can be good experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If your MBA dissertation had some scientific method to **validate** the research results, then leverage that in your PhD application. Try to publish the results on your own in a peer-reviewed conference or workshop. To me, lack of that kind of culture is the big risk when taking on a non-research master's student for a PhD.
Research methodology courses are mandatory for research master's students at my university, and PhD supervisors can force PhD candidates to take this course if they didn't get it elsewhere. There are some decent textbooks on the subject. See if you could audit such a course someplace. However, to make up for the experience of a research master's, you will need to focus the methodology on a specific area of expertise (few textbooks do a good job explaining this, and it's where a supervisor is crucial in my opinion). From your original question, it almost sounds like you did this already, but with little guidance.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/20 | 440 | 1,588 | <issue_start>username_0: *Related to [this question](https://mathoverflow.net/questions/122374/where-to-find-nsf-reports-for-mathematical-expository-purpose) on mathoverflow…*
Indeed, I just found out that to see full proposal or later reports. One needs to file a FOIA request, as described [here](http://www.nsf.gov/policies/foia.jsp).
So I am curious if anyone has done so? And how is the process like?
In particular, can the requester remain confidential after the request (so other people will not know that I made the request)?
Additional follow up question: What kind of people can file FOIA request? Does it have to be US citizens? Or just anyone working in US? etc..<issue_comment>username_1: The name of the requester does not remain confidential.
A friend of mine was recently on the other end. NSF contacted him to tell him that an FOIA request had been made for a copy of his proposal, told him the name of the requester, and asked whether the proposal contained any sensitive information that he wished to have redacted.
The general feeling was that making such a request, rather than contacting the PI directly, was unprofessional and borderline creepy. I second JeffE's comment: **Ask the PI first.**
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: OK. Now I have some **very clear answer**. The list of all requesters is in fact **PUBLISHED** on NSF website.
See, for example, all NSF FOIA request in 2010 (PDF)
<http://www.nsf.gov/policies/2010_FOIA_LOG.pdf>
The link is found at the bottom of this page:
<http://www.nsf.gov/policies/foia.jsp>
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/02/21 | 453 | 1,775 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a research assistant in a neuroscience lab at MIT and I'm considering pursuing a PhD in math or theoretical computer science. The RAs in my lab who want to eventually become neuroscientists are in a perfect place - a large, collaborative environment where they get paid to work closely with neuroscientists and learn hands on what the entire research process is like in that field before committing to a 5 year grad program.
I want an environment as close to this as possible in math or theoretical computer science to solidify my belief that I would be happy pursuing research in these areas. Is this kind of opportunity available in these fields? What is the closest I can get? I did an REU program in undergrad and loved it, but want more if it's out there.
Thank you so much for your advice, this is a great community.<issue_comment>username_1: The name of the requester does not remain confidential.
A friend of mine was recently on the other end. NSF contacted him to tell him that an FOIA request had been made for a copy of his proposal, told him the name of the requester, and asked whether the proposal contained any sensitive information that he wished to have redacted.
The general feeling was that making such a request, rather than contacting the PI directly, was unprofessional and borderline creepy. I second JeffE's comment: **Ask the PI first.**
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: OK. Now I have some **very clear answer**. The list of all requesters is in fact **PUBLISHED** on NSF website.
See, for example, all NSF FOIA request in 2010 (PDF)
<http://www.nsf.gov/policies/2010_FOIA_LOG.pdf>
The link is found at the bottom of this page:
<http://www.nsf.gov/policies/foia.jsp>
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/02/21 | 1,627 | 7,115 | <issue_start>username_0: I obtained my PhD about five years ago and immediately took up a postdoctoral position at a national lab in Japan to continue my research in computer engineering.
Over those five years I worked with the person who is now my supervisor, and trusted him in the same way I would trust any ordinary person, only to learn (too late!) that my trust was misplaced.
After working on a large project of his for about two full-time years, he forced
me to "leave the project". Now that the large project is nearing completion, I have since discovered that he has started to present my ideas and my work as his own.
The administration vacillates between feigning ignorance and admitting there is a problem but then claiming that they are powerless to do anything about it.
What can I do? What *should* I do - and why?<issue_comment>username_1: It is harder to deal with plagiarism in oriental countries than in the western world. It's even harder when your employer is a national lab.
To answer your question, how to **encourage** the administration to handle plagiarism?
There is something you need to know (I suspect you already know it to some extent), orientals tend to treat their faces much more seriously than anything else. This is the key.
Things may not be that serious as you would think. So far, he only presented the idea and the work as if they were his. But I agree that it's a bad sign. You need to deal with it as soon as possible before he goes any further.
**Edit** (I would like to argue that we do not have sufficient information to tell if plagiarism will happen or already happened.)
**End of Edit**
From what you described in the comments, your supervisor seems to have personal issue with you. You might have some conflicts with him without you even knowing it. The key word *face* is the most probable reason I could think of. There is probably some cultural thing buried somewhere you would need to figure out if you want to resolve it. It may not be that serious as you think, could be just misunderstanding.
There is some different thinkings between oriental and western world. In the **western** world, **people take individual ownership** for what they think and do. In the **oriental** world, some tend to think the ideas and the works are products of the **whole team/group**. Thus, the head of the group would present the idea and the work as **the head of the group**. This could be construed as plagiarism in the western world
You said *they are powerless to do anything about it.* This is probably due to that thinking. I must say that changing a culture takes huge efforts and long time. If you want to talk to them to encourage them to handle plagiarism, you need to
>
> Talk to them politely, professionally and **discreetly**.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As you've mentioned, a paper trail is always harder to deal with in presentations—and taking credit is a lot harder to define than on a paper.
Right now, you have a few key challenges: you will first need to find a new job as soon as possible. Secondly, you will need to establish the paper trail that shows that the ideas and results that you have obtained are in fact yours. This requires having a clear email trail, plus any relevant lab notebooks and supporting evidence that shows such work was in fact yours.
Beyond that, you have already done due diligence in that you have alerted the administration to the possibility of academic dishonesty on the part of your advisor, and you have also informed him of your intentions in this matter (by email, which he has received).
If you have done both of these things, then you should be able, as you suggested, to work directly with the editors of any journals in which your advisor chooses to publish this work without you.
However, one other thing that you could do is write up your work independently. Presumably, you are much more knowledgeable about the specifics of the methods and techniques that you've performed, and would be able to write a better paper on this topic than he can by himself (which he would need to do in order to publish without you). You could then offer him to publish those manuscripts. (Before sending him such a manuscript, however, I would be sure to watermark the PDF, and lock it down so that it can't be printed, edited, or copied. Alternatively, I'd only send part of the paper—by withholding the methodologies and conclusions sections, for instance.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Let me start with plagiarism/academic dishonesty is a serious offense and it should always be dealt with. You said, "After working on a large project of his for about two full-time years..." this immediately puts us into a gray area. Did you discuss authorship at the start of the project and if so what was agreed then?
When I employ someone to work on a grant, that doesn't guarantee them co-authorship on everything they work on. Often I need someone to turn a crank and there just isn't the opportunity to make a contribution worthy of authorship. Other times I may not trust the person enough to do anything independently enough and therefore spoon feed them. In my opinion the extent to which supervisors "steal" the work of their advisees is often overrated by advisees, especially ones who have had a falling out with their supervisors.
You have a sour relationship with your former advisor and the first thing you need to do is to repair the relationship. Accusing a former supervisor of academic dishonesty by brandishing words like plagiarism is not helpful in this regards. Talking to him and explaining that you need to publish the work is useful.
I would suggest creating a list of all the projects that you worked on while in his group. From this list, you need to identify the publications that you can generate without needing any resources from him (i.e., access to HIS computer/software) and ones that you need to collaborate with him on. The goal is to identify all potential publications and establish authorship (i.e., what should have been done at the outset).
For each publication that does not need any additional resources, write a short description/abstract about the key findings, propose an author list and order, provide a time line until submission. For these publications, you should be the only one responsible for anything on the time line (apart from providing feedback on drafts). Ask him to provide feedback on the key findings, author list, and time line so that you can tailor them to better fit his needs.
For each publication that requires additional resources, you need to remember, he can ignore your previous work and just regenerate it and write the publications on his own. What you are offering is a collaboration. Again, you need to write a short description/abstract about the key findings and the additional work required, propose an author list and order, and provide a time line until submission. For these publications, the more you expect of other and the more resources you need, the less enticing the collaboration is.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/21 | 923 | 3,598 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an apprentice employed to do mechanical engineering but my real passion has always been computing.
I recently came up with IMHO a good idea to help mitigate DDoS attacks on web servers. I would like to do a write-up of my idea to help contribute to some personal portfolio perhaps so it would help me get into a career in computing if/when I decide to take that path.
I have no exposure to University resources etc but feel a white paper on this topic is probably the best way to present it. So how should I go about writing an academic paper as an outsider to academia?<issue_comment>username_1: There are basically no restriction on *who* can write a paper, so, clearly you can. If you have no affiliation, it might be hard to go publish a "free" paper (e.g., a technical report or a pre-print on arxiv), but you can always consider submitting your idea to a workshop/conference. However, you might have to pay the conferences/travel fees (although some conferences might help you, if you can't afford it). You can also submit your idea to a journal, as many don't charge anything to publish. You can of course also just write a PDF and put it on your website, or even do a long blog post.
There is one thing you might need to be careful of, since you might not be used to write academic paper: a good paper is not just a good idea, this idea needs to be *validated*. In other words, you can't just write: "here is a cool idea I had", you also need to describe how it differs from existing approaches (perhaps your idea has been already published), and you need to describe *why* it's a good idea. There are many approaches to do so, for instance by presenting your idea in a formal setting and *prove* that you can mitigate DDoS attacks (probably under some assumptions). You can also run some experiments, and show that your approach mitigated x% more attacks than some known approaches.
If you're interested in eventually pursuing a career in academia, showing that you can explain and validate your work might be as important as having a good idea (because not only you have a good idea, but you can convince others that it's a good one!).
Note that another approach in your situation could be to implement your idea as an open-source software, and if it's adopted by the community, then it's another form of validation.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There's an alternative approach: **Speak to "an academic".** Don't be afraid of the weird people we are :)
Just one true story: There are two papers by the same two authors, one of them is a renowned professor and the other one works at a farm. The farmer had a very nice idea, wrote it to this professor, and they published it.
[<NAME>](http://taylortiling.com/index.html) lives, according to the address in the papers, in Tasmania, Australia. Professor <NAME> is affiliated to Duke University, North Carolina, USA. Their two common papers are available: [arXiv:1003.4279](http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.4279), [arXiv:1009.1419](http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.1419). I personally witnessed the passion with which Joshua spoke about the details of this story on SubTile conference in January 2013.
---
At any case, make sure that your ideas are clear, because academic people receive various weird stuff and you don't want your mail to just get trashed.
Of course, you might feel "unsafe" that someone "steals" your idea. In that case, a pre-publication of any form (arXiv, blog, free software as mentioned above, etc.) is enough to verify your attribution.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/21 | 655 | 2,893 | <issue_start>username_0: I am working on my PhD now for 1.5 years and was recently asked by my supervisor to assist him with a review. The reviewed paper was also written by a non-native speaker.
For my first publication I bought a book on English writing skills for research papers, which was very helpful for me.
Can I suggest this book to the author of the paper I got for review, so he can improve his English? I do not want to critize him, only to give him an advice I also give my colleagues.
I am not sure if this exceeds my responsibility.<issue_comment>username_1: Certainly, poor English is a significant problem, one that hinders communication, and undoubtedly has an impact on one's ability to publish top-quality articles.
It may sound a bit rude to make such a suggestion, but in extreme cases I think it is warranted. It's probably better and more cost effective than trying to improve the English yourself and better in the long run than simply ignoring the problem (and suggesting to reject the paper).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As editor in chief of an international journal I often come across these problems. There are several ways forward (in no particular order):
* Does the journal publisher offer links to services to improve the language? Cite those to the author.
* You can start correcting the English for about a page or two and then state that the authors must seek the help of a native English speaking person (I have found that this is unfortunately not always a sure way to success). By high-lighting the level of problems, it is harder to ignore by anybody. It is after all the author's responsibility and most journals state this very clearly. Remember that the editor is also part of the publishing procedure and you may express your thoughts to him/her to get assistance in your requests.
* If the problems are less severe and you think the paper is very deserving, do the work. But don't make it a habit.
* If the first author has an identifiable native English speaking person as a co-author there is no real excuse and you should point that out to the *editor*.
The suggestion of providing references may seem like a good one but make these suggestions to the editor. I really do not think such books will be of much use other than in the long term for authors who have problem grasping the English language; and in some cases never.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is anonymous reviewing? If so, absolutely! A book may be helpful. There are also a number of companies/services (see for example [Elsevier](http://webshop.elsevier.com/languageediting/) or [this list](http://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/english_language.asp)) out there aimed at helping non-English speakers prepare scientific publications. I routinely suggest that authors revise their writing before something gets published.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/21 | 392 | 1,445 | <issue_start>username_0: I got my PhD one year ago; I am looking for a position (e.g., postdoc).
I am going to a fairly attended conference, and was pondering about how to make audience aware that I am on the market.
* An explicit, dedicated slide (maybe at the end)?
* A verbal statement?
* A caption on my T-shirt? :)
Would you find any of this appropriate?
What would you advice me to do?
**EDIT**
In case you think it's not a good idea, I'd be interested in knowing why.
Otherwise, I'd be interested in any additional implementation advice (how to formulate that, or whatever comes to mind).<issue_comment>username_1: I would add to the end of your conclusion a simple statement:
>
> By the way, I'm looking for a postdoc position.
>
>
>
I've seen it done before, and I don't think people minded.
A T-shirt could be a fun way of broaching the topic when talking to people.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't be shy about advertising. As you and Dave suggest, place it at the end, but you don't need to be very subtle about it. I've seen a number of talks where people advertise the fact that they're on the market, and everyone understands the need to do this. Presumably you're worried about it seeming desperate, but it isn't.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Be personal (if possible). Try to research the person or people that may be interested in you and approach them directly.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/21 | 536 | 2,264 | <issue_start>username_0: Some jobs ask you to submit 'teaching evaluations'. Assuming the school doesn't have any preference for how I submit the materials, my issue is that I literally have hundreds of teaching evaluations - If I just send them all I know no one is going to look through them all, but if I do any sort of condensing I feel as though I will be clearly cherry picking the good comments. Any suggestions for making the most out of these materials in a job application?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think a modicum of cherry-picking is a bad thing in this regard. What you need to send is a set of teaching evaluations that describes what is significant about your teaching -- the
>
> Great teacher!
>
>
>
comments aren't particularly worth it, but the
>
> Dr. X constantly provided clear examples of the material, and it made the difficult topics more concrete.
>
>
>
samples can provide the insight that will be helpful to a hiring committee.
The committee is trying to get a feel for *why* you are a good teacher (be that the case), and that's why they want the evaluations. I have provided bulleted lists of evaluation comments, but I have also provided a link to all of my comments from multiple classes. The evaluation website at the university where I taught recently actually provided a statistical breakdown of the survey questions on each evaluation topic, so I was able to highlight the statistical takeaways from the surveys.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: First, in most cases you have summary pages that give your overall statistics and even compare you to other teachers in the department. By all means, submit those (juts scan them all into a single PDF). Those are not cherry-picking in any way, so that would remove your main concern. Second, on the top of it, sift through the hundreds you have to choose the most meaningful and nice comments and scan 10-15 of them (you shouldn't be shy and afraid to show your best in your application: after all, if you tell me that you always dress as neatly and behave as nicely as you do on your interview day, I'll just laugh). That should be more than enough for any hiring committee member unless he has a strong prejudice against you for some reason.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/22 | 730 | 2,772 | <issue_start>username_0: I need to get citations (with complete info including authors, journal, date) to all my papers. What's the best way (hopefully without too much manual copy & paste) to do this?
What i so far tried:
Google Scholar seem to give more complete list of papers that cite my paper that it includes papers in non-English language journals etc. But i can't see how to get authors, journal title, volume number etc quickly from the Google Scholar search output.<issue_comment>username_1: You can use [Scopus](http://www.scopus.com) to do that, but only if you / your institute has access.
Search for an article that you (or someone else) has authored, click on the author name, then click on "citations".
Scopus screenshot, author page
If you click on the *13* link, you will see a full list of documents citing <NAME>:
Scopus screenshot, author citation page
In my experience, Scopus doesn't have many false positives, although it might miss publications in new or unknown journals.
I'm not sure if Scopus deeplinking works, but [try this](http://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?origin=resultslist&authorId=31267510200&zone=) for a direct link.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As an alternative to scopus, you can use Web of Science. It's also subscription based though, and your institution may or may not have access.
Go to <http://apps.webofknowledge.com> , select the tab labelled "Web of Science", and enter your name in the search field for the author. When the results show up, you should see a link labelled "Create citation report" near the top right corner of the results list. Follow that, and in the results table you will see an element "Citing Articles[?] : nnn", where nnn is the number of citing articles. Click on the number, and you are taken to a list of all citing articles from the Web of Science database.
In case the result list after searching for your name has false positives, you can exclude them from the citation report either by setting a year range, or manually excluding them one-by-one.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: [Harzing's Publish or Perish](http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm) software is the tool which will probably help you most. It is a Windows application, which allows you to specify queries and then goes to Google Scholar to retrieve and sort the references, citations, etc. Besides computing h-index and a host of other bibliometric indices, it allows you to produce reports from your searches and this is what you seem to be after. Even though running only on Windows, installing [Wine](http://www.winehq.org/) emulator to run it is worth the hassle.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/22 | 2,006 | 7,994 | <issue_start>username_0: Back when I was in graduate school and as a post-doc, life was fairly blissful. Only one big responsibility: research. Now as a faculty member I find *so* many things to do. Teach, supervise undergrads and grads, publish papers, perform research, participate in service/administrative activities, get funding, etc. Plus throw in family life, friends, etc.
I've looked at all sorts of productivity systems over the years (GTD, 7 Habits, etc.), and have settled on a simple todo list method, where I have a master list of tasks in a todo list that I periodically review. The problem is the list just seems to get bigger and bigger. More gets on the list than comes off, especially during busy seasons, like when teaching or when grants are due.
I realize that *busy* is part of the game, but how do you keep track of everything and not go crazy?<issue_comment>username_1: I use a Todo List manager called [Things](http://culturedcode.com/things/) on the Mac. It syncs via the cloud with my iPad, so in principle I always have my lists. Lists can be tagged and sorted and categorized and so forth, so with some discipline, it can be a really helpful too.
That said, I still have lists of major "deliverables" on my whiteboard and lists of daily activities on scraps of paper. Ideally, what I need is less work, not a better tool.
Re: not going crazy: go on vacation, go cycling, stop thinking about work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Another nice todo list system is [Trello](http://trello.com) which lets you do things like add mini-check lists to items, make separate lists for each thing, add notes to items, add pictures to items, and add other people to items. The ability to add sub-items helps a lot in that it makes it feel like I'm getting somewhere on large projects that take a lot of time and hang around in my to-do list for weeks.
Trello is also really nice for sharing/collaborating/delegating work. In our lab, we have a Trello board for any projects where multiple people are collaborating so everyone is able to keep track of who's responsible for what.
Last, it lets you move your items around so that you can prioritize them. Stuff that you need to get done sooner goes on the top while less critical stuff is on the bottom. I also have a bit of a garbage cleaning policy where if it's been sitting in the low priority for a while and I still haven't gotten around to it, it goes into a theoretical "someday when I have free time" list.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: For things that can be decomposed into tasks, I use (and recommend) [Remember The Milk](http://www.rememberthemilk.com/).
The best thing is that you can set task with everything (date due, priority, tags, ...) with their markup, e.g.
```
check references #work #writing #qft-project ^tomorrow !2
```
It works on web, and as an application for mobile devices, with which it synchronizes (the only bad thing is that in free version you can do it once 24h).
When there are larger goals (e.g. "finish a paper") they need to be split in smaller tasks.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: This is a bit similar to other answers - keep a good list - but that's not going to fix your problem. Your problem is that employers, academic or industry, will always try to get more and more out of you. That is just the nature of things.
So, yes, keep a list of what is important and what is urgent and learn to drop the other stuff. It is natural to try to do more and more things, especially when some seem really interesting, however, you have to decide what you can do and what you cannot.
The life of an academic is not one of punching the clock and working 9-5. The good news is that we do get a bit of flexibility. However, sometimes we do need to fight for that flexibility.
You might read a recent book [The Four-Hour Work Week](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0307465357). There is a lot which does not relate to academic work (at least not to teaching) at all (like trying to work from home). However, it does include some very good reminders to simply do the important stuff and drop the unimportant stuff.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: I am a Gmail user and prefer [Gmail Tasks](http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=106237). **[Watch a short video about it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=qrka_3jui8M).**
I have a personal email and work email, so I separate the task lists naturally on both accounts - it allows me to focus on work while I'm *at* work, without distractions about home stuff.
Google Tasks integrate into Gmail, as many tasks originate from an email. A great way to remove an email from the inbox is to create a new task with the email (if you can't take care of the task straight away). Gmail has keyboard shortcuts with tasks, so `SHIFT`-`T` makes a new task with the current email.
There is an iOS app called Go Tasks that syncs to Google Tasks, with support for multiple accounts.
There are no priorities, but I either put deadlines (which cause tasks to show on a Google calendar) or shift them up/down on the task list. Tasks can be hierarchical, so I define themes (courses I teach, articles, committees, etc.) and tasks within them.
Regarding the growing number of tasks, many items every year get closed without being done, but that's life. They're lower priority and you can't do it all. Often a task becomes OBE - overtaken by events. Some items, like course improvement tasks, stay on the list until the next time I teach the course.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: First, it helps to have a list system that allows you to prioritize the important and temporarily ignore the less important. I use Omnifocus, though it's not everyone's cup of tea.
Second, as more and more gets added to the list, eventually you have to realize that there are things on the list that will never get done. Those things are only burning up your mental energy. I periodically review my lists and delete things that I don't believe will get done. After doing this for a while, you start to sense which things won't get done, even **before they get onto the list**, and you start saying no to them in advance. You have a finite amount of time, so you have to be selective in what you choose to do with it.
For example, a few years ago I wouldn't have dreamed of saying 'no' to any interesting research collaboration. But nowadays doing so is absolutely essential to my sanity.
The same advice is given in [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/8010/81).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I read somewhere that sometimes simplifying a complex problem requires a complex system - think about the automatic transmission in a car.
I use a combination of OmniFocus for task and project management, and Evernote for saving resources. There is some overlap between the two, in that OmniFocus tasks can have attachments, but if the usefulness of a resource extends beyond one task, it definitely goes into Evernote. Premium users of Evernote can search within images of documents, which comes in handy when looking for a gas receipt, for instance.
I love OmniFocus' location-based contexts, so when I drive up to my apartment, a list of tasks I can do there appears on my phone. Other contexts are more mental shifts, say from 'studying' to 'phone'.
Using these tools has given me a trusted system in which to dump all the minutiae that was clogging my brain - one of the tenets of Getting Things Done.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Use a tracking/ticketing tool, like eg. [Redmine](http://www.redmine.org/) to help you organize your tasks and track their progress. This is definitely more involved than a simple to-do list but it's worth the effort many times over.
I find this especially useful when shared with other people (coworkers, students, etc...) and it's seamlessly integrating with subversion systems.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/02/22 | 707 | 3,112 | <issue_start>username_0: I just received a paper for review that does not have a single citation (in the text) of its references.
I wonder if this is common in other areas non-CS related.
Since it is a conference, I don't think I should contact the editor, but I do think it should lose many points in its evaluation.
Overall the paper is well written, and they do not seem amateurish people writing their first paper.
What would you do in this case?<issue_comment>username_1: Reject.
No work exists in isolation. The authors need to position their work in relation to existing work, and this requires more than just putting a bunch of papers in the bibliography section: it requires a detailed comparison. The authors failed to do this.
*In any case, there will always be another conference for them to resubmit to.*
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My initial reaction is that they merely have encountered a set of issues for which there are no relevant papers they could cite. For example, where would you expect citations in there? Citations for the sake of citations are a Bad Thing. Citations should advance the position of the paper in a meaningful, shoulders-of-giants kind of way.
And initial reactions are often the right one[citation needed].
But upon further reflection, it occurs to me that with the vast multitude of papers out there, the likelihood of not having a single paper that could help advance this paper's position in a meaningful way is probably very, very small. What is much more likely is that the authors either did not do their due diligence in looking for work that could have advanced their position and/or saved them time, or worse, specifically excluded other research because glaring similarities. Both are common, and either is bad for the authors and the scientific community as a whole.
The main thing that concerns me is... where did they get the idea to do whatever is in the paper? Was it not at least *partially* based on some published work that they're either challenging or advancing? That is the most troubling thing to me.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's not clear from your question, whether they simply don't regard other papers in the field, or they do have related work etc. but they omit the in-body-citations.
If it is the first case, I'd second Dave's answer (unless it's a brand new question with a brand new technique that solves it, and they clearly say that no related work can be found to the best of their knowledge).
However, if it is the second case, it seems quite technical issue that can be easily fixed, and in this case you can just mention in your review that references are missing and this should be fixed (also note this to the PC chair; s/he can condition the acceptance on fixing this issue)
The fact that it's a conference, in my eyes, makes it more flexible -- papers should be considered mainly by merit and not by technicalities. I can think of the opposite case, where the paper has all the citation, gets accepted, but in the camera-ready version all references are removed.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/22 | 2,748 | 11,569 | <issue_start>username_0: What is the advantage of becoming a full professor if you are already an associate professor with tenure? Why not just stay an associate professor for life? What is the key difference between an associate professor and a full professor?
Why continue to write papers if you already have tenure? Can't a tenured associate professor stop writing papers and still have a job?<issue_comment>username_1: One key difference is that full professors are paid more.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: One could say that a full professor has a more prominent position in its department, but that is somehow more trouble (e.g. you can have to be chair) than entertainment.
I would say that the real point is that becoming a full professor is a recognition of your qualities.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In the Netherlands, you need to be a full professor before you can be the main supervisor (promotor) of a PhD student. Otherwise you can only be a co-supervisor (co-promotor), and thereby miss out on all the credit.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The difference is often also that full professors have their own group or department. Associate professors often have just a few PhDs and postdocs. So, getting full professorship is a means of really creating your own group of people, and direct them towards research that you think needs to be done. In that sense it is comparable to rising in the ranks of any ordinary company, you start as a business unit manager, and then go on to be CEO.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Agreeing with the answer provided by username_1, and following from the OP's comments to it:
In addition to an increase in pay, full professors often have a different expectation for **service** - to the department, institution, professional, whatever. Usually, these sorts of activities are undertaken to gain promotion and/or tenure. As a full professor, there are few options for advancement, and so fewer expectations that you do things to earn yourself a promotion.
Of course, slacking off after becoming a full professor will cheat you out of that better-paying named professorship or named chair.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> Why continue to write papers if you already have tenure? Can't a tenured associate professor not write papers and still have a job?
>
>
>
The general answer is simple: most of the people who would quit doing research after tenure in fact quit before tenure. The ones who make it to tenure generally care about research and intend to continue at it for a long time.
In more detail:
Reaching an associate professor position in a research university is a long journey. At this stage you could stop writing papers and lead a comfortable life, if you were willing to live with the disapproval of your department chair (which is not an easy thing: there are many ways they can make your life unpleasant even if they can't fire you). However, if that's all you wanted, you could have had it with much less effort along the way. By the time you reach tenure, you have let many opportunities to change your career go by, and you have repeatedly passed through filters intended to measure your talent and ambition. This selection process means tenured professors at research universities generally really want to do research. Now, sometimes people change their minds or burn out, and a few might never have intended to maintain their research programs. However, on the whole this is a group that has been selected for research enthusiasm and ambition, so it's no surprise that on average they maintain the desire to do research.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: *"Why continue to write papers if you already have tenure?"*
Because it is fun?
While some academics forge a rewarding career from teaching and administration, for most academics research is what provides a substantial part of their job satisfaction. If research is not something you actively *want* to do, academia might not be a good career path, especially not being a senior academic.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: Yet another reason to seek promotion to full professor is **political influence**. Especially in larger/older departments and universities, administrative positions (department chair, dean, etc.) and membership in influential committees may be restricted to full professors. (For example, in my department, only full professors may serve on the promotions and tenure committee; similar restrictions apply to college- and campus-level committees.)
This is the flip side of the **service** expectation that username_5 mentions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: I am a tenured associate professor in 'hard science' at a major research institution (part of that cluster famous for the Ivy on the walls). I've been an associate professor for ~5 years.
Fairly recently, my chair asked about timetable for promotion. Said Chair fell to the floor (almost) when I replied "I could care squat about promotion to full professor". Seriously - who cares? There are two motivations I can think of for wanting promotion. (1) money, and/or (2) ego. I get paid more than enough in my current position, thank you very much, and anyone who thinks a different academic title means anything to anyone (other than their own inner ego) is delusional.
I'm an associate professor. I write 3-4 good solid papers a year (have about 60-70 so far, 2 books, and a bunch of book chapters), do my share of teaching, edit for a couple of journals, get grants when I feel like it, and supervise students if they're good and I feel like it. I shift research gears with some frequency, pursuing what interests me. I go to meetings if I feel like it, not as a career move. That, of course, is the point of tenure. I do what I want, more or less.
The university system is predicated on people striving for promotion, for 2 reasons. One, the bean counters and political types in the university administration understand that outside of academics, like government agencies, alumni groups, and other folks who might have $$$ to give to the school, title carries gravitas. A lot of universities make a big deal out of the number of 'full professors'. Second, and more to the point, they want the lure of promotion to keep you active - not at anything as trivial as 'intellectual work', but...getting grants. Pure and simple. Without overhead off major grants, universities would crash and burn - so, how do you keep everyone motivated to keep playing the grant game? Hold out the lure of the 'perks' of being a full professor.
Problem is, the system doesn't account for people who could care less about money, or title. People who publish just fine without a lot of $$$ rolling in. People like me. I'm doing what I want to do now. I loathe administrative assignments, and if doing them is a necessary step on the road to 'full' title, I'll pass.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: I noticed one of the responses mentioned the increase in pay. Sure, that would be nice. As one in the process of going up for tenure in business, I can tell you that research is required even after tenure is granted. It is a common misconception that you cannot be fired after you receive tenure. It does become more difficult. As long as the university needs your skills AND you are doing what you are supposed to be doing (teaching, service, AND research), then it is virtually impossible to get fired. But, to satisfy the research component, you must stay what is referred to as academically qualified. This means that you continue to do research even after tenure. In fact, you must continue to do so, even after you have become a full professor. Failure to do so results in negative evaluations by department heads which leads to lower if not stagnant pay. It leads to the implementation of plans for corrective action and if those plans are not followed can lead to dismissal from the university, EVEN IF YOU HAVE TENURE.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: never mind-- I'll just give you one. The answer is that, for many faculty, it is not necessary to become a full professor. There are distinct advantages to doing so, however: 1) salary. If you remain an associate professor, salary generally will not go up any more, whereas if you become full, you will get a substantial pay increase, and will probably be eligible for future merit based pay increases. If you remain associate, this will not happen, so salary will actually go down relative to inflation; 2) service: associate professors have a harder life than is usually imagined. They actually get the worst, most onerous service tasks, because assistant professors are usually shielded from these, and full professors can opt out of them, and get more interesting service work. This is especially true at research universities. Running the graduate program is almost always an associate professor's job, and it's a ton of work. Full professors have more freedom more salary; 3) Status and prestige, leading to other opportunities: There is a stigma attached to staying associate for too long. It may seem petty, but one's colleagues are a little like siblings-- you are with them for life, and you see some rise up quick and others stay behind. There is often built up resentment and jealousy, and we are all only human. On a less petty level, there are certain prestigious, well paying fellowships and other positions that are easier to get if you are full (eg., editing a prestigious journal or being president of your discipline's scholarly organization or running a search committee and determining who your department is going to hire). Finally, at some institutions, if you do not continue to advance, you will not be fired, but you can be demoted away from the position you have to a more teaching-based job. You will teach more undergrad classes (and more classes overall), and may not be able to advise grad students or perhaps even teach grad classes. Again, this varies from institution to institution. The pressure is greater at prestigious research universities rather than liberal arts colleges
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: Interesting discussion. I am a full professor at a research university. My rank does allow me to participate in any committee. It also enables me to be the department chair (I have) and to chair other committees.
I still write academic research papers and get research grants and contracts. Why? First, I have spent many years establishing a reputation in my field and do not want to forsake that reputation. Second, I want to be a positive role model for my undergraduate and graduate students as they move toward professional life. Third, I have financial motivation to do so (my university grants me a percentage of incoming research funds). Fourth: the research I do is important theoretically and for people who do important tasks in the "real world." Therefore, I feel like (hope) I'm making a difference in the world. Fifth, importantly, my graduate students need money, and my department doesn't receive enough from the upper administration. Therefore, grants/contracts pay their way. Sixth, I learned to be a driven, Type A, OCD academic in grad school, and old habits die hard. :^)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Most universities offer a bigger increase for promotion to Full Professor. However some universities may have amounts for promotion to Associate Professor at $3,000 and Full Professor $4,000. Do know that these amounts are below average.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/02/24 | 241 | 1,049 | <issue_start>username_0: How related two conferences are if B is sponsored by A? If A is a top conference, does this make B a worth-trusting conference also? For example, SIGCOMM is a top conference in computer networks & communications, and CoNEXT is sponsored by it. Does that automatically make CoNEXT a quality conference?<issue_comment>username_1: The top conference has reputation to keep up, so if they associate themselves with the other conference this indicates that they trust the organizers of the other conference to do a good job. So, I'd see the endorsement as a sign that the level of the conference is probably good, although there are no guarantees.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure what it means for one conference to sponsor another. In the particular case you mention, "SIGCOMM" is both the name of a conference and the name of a group within the ACM that sponsors that conference. So it's likely that SIGCOMM (the group) is sponsoring CONEXT, rather than SIGCOMM (the conference).
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/24 | 940 | 3,947 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it a good thing for an undergraduate student to publish in a low-tier conference as first author? Or should the student avoid such places and only publish in at least reputable places? If it is a good thing, how should the student present his study in the graduate admissions process to admissions members (since the conference name is mostly unknown to much of them)?
Note that, by low tier, I mean the conferences which are ranked at "*C level*" according to [ERA](http://core.edu.au/cms/images/downloads/conference/08sorttitleERA2010_conference_list.pdf) (Excellence in Research for Australia).<issue_comment>username_1: Let me answer the important parts of your question:
>
> Is a good thing for an undergraduate student to publish in a low-tier conference as first author ? Or should the student avoid from such places and only publish in at least reputable places ?
>
>
>
**Yes, especially if the venue is peer-reviewed.**
As the answers to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/6010/importance-of-undergraduate-research) suggest, graduate schools look for evidence of **research potential**. The undergraduate research experience is about developing some basic skills and demonstrating that you are capable of handling a research project. Publishing at a third-tier conference, so long as there is some level of peer review, is better than no publications. Would publishing at a higher tier conference be better? Sure, but it might not be worth the effort or the risk of rejection. Publishing at a third-tier conference would look better than being rejected from a first-tier conference. Being first author on a paper at a lower tier conference should hold more weight than being a middle author on a paper at a higher-ranked conference.
Your research adviser probably has some wisdom about the level of conference at which your work should be presented. Choosing a lower tier conference is not about making your work seem less important. The choice might be about guaranteeing you get the change to present it at all.
>
> If it is a good thing, how should the student present his study in graduate admissions process to admissions members, since the conference name is mostly unknown to much of them?
>
>
>
Present your work and conference presentation the same way you would present any other similar experiences. If you have to provide a personal statement as part of your application, write about the experience and how it benefited you. If they ask for a list of relevant accomplishments, include this presentation in that list. Put it in on your resumé. Ask your research adviser for a letter of recommendation.
Do not use any negative language or derogatory language when describing your experience. For example, don't mention that the conference is lower tier or that you thought you could have presented at a better one. If the admissions committee knows about the conference, then they already know about its ranking. If they do not, then you should not be the one to give any hint that you think your experience might have been sub-par.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Just to add to extensive username_1's answer - as far as I know, ERA has been discontinued, but, Brazilian CS community did a conference ranking for their internal evaluation purposes. Here is the list (explanations are in Portuguese, but the names of the conferences are from all over the world) - <http://www.capes.gov.br/images/stories/download/avaliacao/Comunicado_004_2012_Ciencia_da_Computacao.pdf>, A1 is the best, B5 is worse - that is essentially based on h-index of a conference computed via this tool: <http://shine.icomp.ufam.edu.br/index.php>
May be the conference where you published is of better position there:)? There are also several community-driven rankings but I cannot post links to them as my reputation is not enough for posting more than 2 links;)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/24 | 343 | 1,107 | <issue_start>username_0: I've tried googling around for this but I haven't really understood how the British grading scheme works. I am specifically interested in knowing the following things:
1. What is a 2:1?
2. What is a level A?
3. How can I convert from and to A, B, C grades to numerical grades?<issue_comment>username_1: The UK system uses the notation of 1st, 2.1, 2.2, 3rd as degree classifications. Most individual modules/classes are grade on either an A, B, C, ... scale or a percentage scale. I believe the conversion of A-=70=1st and B-=60=2.1 is pretty universal. At reasonable universities, approximately 10% of students get a first and 60% get a 2.1.
Under no circumstances would I advise converting your own marks on an application. State the marks you got and if it is a particularly bizarre system provide a link where they can get more information.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: * An A is 70% upwards (this is also known as a 1st)
* A 2:1 is 60%-69% (also known as a B or upper second)
* A 2:2 is a C 50%-59% (lower second)
* A 3rd is 40-49% (a d)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/23 | 2,638 | 10,743 | <issue_start>username_0: I applied to a prestigious university in the States for my PhD but was unfortunately rejected. I had a great undergraduate track record... but still didn't quite make it. The faculty I really, *really* want to work with are at this University... I really don't know what to do. I spent the whole day refreshing my email, waiting on the off-chance that an acceptance would come... but it didn't. I'm honestly devastated right now. I know I shouldn't feel so strongly about this, but I'm an incredibly competitive person my nature and I've wanted to attend this institution since I was a freshman in high school.
What are my options? I did apply to some backup schools...but I don't know if I should consider going to one of them or just waiting a year and reapplying... Any help would be greatly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: OK, I will try to form an answer.
Last week I set through a three hour memorial presentation for the 25 years since the death of Feynman. The person who was presenting the way the Feynman Lectures series ( red books) caught the imagination of physicists made the following comment: ".most of the real students in his audience left physics" . I tried to find a link but did not succeed. But I had some personal experience:
Back in 1964, when I was a graduate student in a nascent school in Athens, Greece, after a semester of field theory from the book by Bogoliubov went to a Cern summer school in Yugoslavia. There [Veltman](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martinus_J._G._Veltman) gave three weeks of lectures where the scales fell from my eyes and I realized in my gut feelings what all the fuss with operators was about: crossections. Enthused by this I managed to get a place at the Erice meeting of 1964 where Feynman would lecture. I was severely disappointed.
I realize now that I joined at the time the students from his feynman series course :). The reason? At the time we were all excited about the eightfold way and quarks and tantalizing SU(3) . Feynman spent his time in showing us how HE derived the same things in what was for me not a particularly elegant way.
I also followed a series of lectures he gave in 1981 in a Crete workshop when QCD was all the rage, and again , he derived for us QCD in his own unique way. This time I could appreciate it having become sophisticated enough to admire how he could think out of the box still at his age.
My anecdotes are to show that a physics personality may be very attractive to an aspiring physicist but that does not mean that being a student of Feynman would allow one to develop as an independent thinker next to his shade. If you are competitive, you should think of this .
In your place I would choose one of my alternate universities, looking at how the graduate students from there were placed as post docs, and not waste time : most original thoughts come before 30 for physicists.
my two cents.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I understand that your question has been migrated, and therefore it might not be obvious whether you want to have your career in academia. But if that's the case, not being accepted to your first choice is probably not as bad as it first seems.
First of all, you don't need to be in the same university to collaborate with the faculty you *really* want to work with. Perhaps it would be easier if you were in the same department, but you're starting a 45+ years career, you will have plenty of opportunities to work with him/her in the future. Getting your PhD is just the first step, not the final one.
As some comments say, in the end, *where* you did your PhD is not the most important, *what* you do during it is. If you can find another nice place to work, then consider it as a challenge to work hard enough to get a permanent position in your dream university later.
Finally, just to look at the bright side of things, not getting there might be a chance: a very important aspect to measure the quality of a PhD is to show how you can do *independent* research, i.e., without your main advisor. Hence, doing your PhD with someone you admire (I'm extrapolating here), although very rewarding on the short term, might tie you to work only with him/her, and thus reduce your visibility as an independent researcher.
To answer shortly your question: since you're competitive (and many people are in academia), go do your PhD where you are accepted, do the best PhD ever witnessed in this university, get the best publications, and then people will look at your work more than the place you did your PhD.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Disappointment is a real part of life, *especially* in academia.
My belief is that, in order to succeed in academia, one needs to maintain a *concrete yet ultimately attainable set of goals*. These goals should be things that have a realistic probability of being achieved, but allows you some room to maneuver around in which to attain them.
Saying "I want to go to graduate school to get a PhD in [insert field of choice here]" is reasonable and gives you several routes to get there. Saying "I want to go to graduate school X to work with professor Y on topic Z" places way too many constraints on yourself: first you need to get into graduate school X, then hope that professor Y is still offering projects in topic Z, and prefers *you* to other applicants in the program. This is a way of setting yourself up for disappointment.
So, what I would recommend is regrouping. Find an alternate strategy for yourself. What do you want to do in graduate school—beyond working with Prof. X or Y (who by the way, might not be a very good graduate mentor)? Figure out what the goals you have are, both for your graduate degree and beyond, and then figure out what options, among the ones you still have available, will be the ones that best get you there.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: **Go to grad school at the best place where you were accepted**, and work hard to take advantage of whatever opportunities that school has to offer (even if they were not what you first envisioned). At the same time, keep in mind the **possibility of transferring after you finish a masters degree**. This is fairly common in mathematics (my field). It can be a great way to "move up" to a higher quality school.
If you're considering transferring, you should immediately begin working (at your first school) to **network** and to **develop relationships with professor who can write you letters of recommendation** (obviously, you should also **publish good papers**). In fact, you should do all of these things regardless, but now you will have more urgency. One advantage of this approach is that your work will be valuable whether you transfer or stay at the same school.
In short, it sounds like you had your (academic) life planned out, and now you must make a new plan. One weakness of your first plan is that it was "fragile" in the sense that it depended on many things outside of your control. **You will be happier (and generally more successful) if you focus your plans and energies on things *inside* your control.**
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: A similar thing happened to me, although I did get the academic position at first, but not the funding a few months later. I was absolutely gutted.
Right now I'm writing from the comfortable position of a PhD student at a place (another place!) which is great in almost any respect I can think of. In retrospect, here is what I learned:
* By enrolling in grad studies, you're entering a whole new arena. In good schools, nearly every student who comes in is used to being in the top 10% of his year. Of them, in grad school, only 10% will have this distinction. Sometimes, dealing with this disappointment starts with the admissions process. But wherever you're admitted to, it will continue: a good part of being a scientist is about becoming genuinely interested to hear more whenever you're told you're doing something wrong. This goes against every gut instinct you have, and takes time to internalize.
* Universities have rankings, which gives an impression that they're in competition with each other. But great science comes from having many different people poke at a problem from different angles. This means that there is normally good collaboration going on between labs (i.e. universities) working on any given subfield. It is not uncommon for a student to be shared between supervisors from different universities, so you still have the opportunity to collaborate with the lab you were initially interested in even if you go elsewhere.
* You can always try again at the original university, either by transferring during your graduate studies, or by applying for a postdoc.
* If you have great passion about a particular area of research, it will very likely be ignited once you come in close contact with some other area of research. Mastering new concepts, and pushing the boundaries of your field with exciting new research, is just intrinsically pleasing. So if you like research, you will likely enjoy any lab you get into.
* Ultimately, your chances for remaining in academia will mostly depend on your publication record. If you do well in that respect, nobody will take it against you if you didn't go to a particular school. On the other hand, a one-year break in your studies could look bad.
So hang in there: it's not easy being rejected, but not so many options are closed to you as it may seem at this moment. I would just go for another school and work my way from there if I were you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: If you really want to study in particular place, you can consider doing PhD another place (where you get admitted) and then apply again. But beware, as [username_3](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/8179/49) says, putting too many constrains is risky (typically people apply to at least a few different universities).
It may depend on your priorities, but one friend of mine applied to a few PhD programs in US (from EU)
* one year he got rejected everywhere,
* the next year he got admitted everywhere (and they were only top-tier universities).
So, what was the difference?
In the meantime he has learnt how to apply (e.g. how to write a research statement, how to get an appropriate guy for a recommendation letter) and got external funding (Fulbright fellowship). He spent the extra year doing research in another institute, so it was not wasted in any sense.
(BTW: The story / "how to": <http://kni.wikidot.com/gdzie-doktorat> (in Polish), and research statements "before vs after" <http://kni.wikidot.com/moja-historia> (links on the top - at least they are in English :)).)
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/02/24 | 1,459 | 5,920 | <issue_start>username_0: Prof. X added me as a coauthor on a paper , although my contribution was minor. I told him so, he insisted and said it was necessary for me (I can't give details). Later my relation with Prof X seriously soured. I asked that he remove my name from the paper: I already have an OK publication record (about 100 citations) and I didn't want to pollute it with an undeserved paper, especially in view of the souring of my relation with Prof X.
I had an essential contribution in all my previous papers. Prof X said it was impossible to remove my name since it was already submitted. I reluctantly accepted. The paper was rejected. Prof X wants to resubmit it to a less prestigious journal. I definitely don't want my name on it. Prof X insists to keep my name, saying that re-submitting the paper without my name might harm his reputation in the community. I can't claim to be white as snow : It's clear that I should never have accepted to have my name on this paper in the first place. I don't want to antagonize him further, but what should I do now ? Is it true that resubmitting without my name can harm his reputation ? Isn't there some way around this ? (My field is Math/Physics/Engineering. I can't give more details).<issue_comment>username_1: Standards (and customs) for coäuthorship depend heavily on your field, but if you contributed to the work reported in the paper, you might first want to consider actually accepting coäuthorship:
1. Unless you think the work is actually crap, there is no downside (having a few not-so-great papers doesn't actually hurt, even if it doesn't help your career).
2. If you worked with prof. X, it might be nice to have something (a paper) to show for it.
3. The relationship may have soured, but are you ready to burn that bridge? If he insists on coäuthorship, a flat refusal will annoy him, probably because it would hurt him for some strategic reason.
Now, on the other hand, it's entirely your choice to make. Nobody can force you: if it comes to that, just flatly state that you do not wish to be a coäuthor on the paper. After that was made clear, and in writing, there is little chance prof. X will submit it with your name behind your back: that would be a very severe breach of ethics, and grounds for immediate retraction of the paper when you find out.
Finally, on the question of whether resubmitting without your name can actually hurt him… yeah, it could be an annoyance. There are a few people (editor and referees for the first paper) who would have knowledge that the same paper was submitted twice with different author lists, which definitely gives a bad impression of the senior author.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> The relationship may have soured, but are you ready to burn that bridge? If he insists on coäuthorship, a flat refusal will annoy him, probably because it would hurt him for some strategic reason.
>
>
>
This happens more than you think (user6114), it is common. Again the choice is yours. A know a few students that had this "offer". Offer to put someone has co-author or offer to be co-author...the decision is 100% yours.. but ... if the paper was alreday submitted you shouldn't ask to take out your name.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Adding to (and emphasizing parts of) the answers by Fx and username_2:
First there seems to be two issues: (1) you were added to a paper by the first author where you did (and still do) not think you deserved it and (2) you now are in conflict with the first author and may not want to be associated with him/her.
I think you can approach this from another perspective. Based on the assumption that you pursue an academic career, does this paper hurt you by, for example, it being bad science, or the first author being a *persona non grata* in the community? If the answer is no to these questions, I would as a general rule say, leave it. To follow up, there is not much you can do without raising a lot of commotion and probably risk being branded yourself even if that is not true.
I can understand your feeling of not being worthy of co-authorship, and my only comment there is that it is of course not good to be part of a paper if you cannot defend its content in some way or another. But, I think many end up being added to papers where their input may be marginal. I see it as a natural part (problem) of the process. Of course to add people left and right as a rule is something to be combatted, so save your energy for those cases.
Then to cap off by the uncomfortable truth, the system we live in pushes us to publish or perish (as was the title in a Science debate article some time ago). With time this paper is just one of many in your list and simply adds to your publication list. If it is good you may benefit from citations and that might be your reward in the end. In other words being a little pragmatic doesn't hurt.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I wouldn't know if people care for a change in the list of authors as long as its length does not become ridiculous compared to the length of the paper.
If you don't want your name on that paper, have him remove it and go all the way! If he refuses you can always go past him and approach the editors directly. Explicitly stating to the editors "I had no part in this contribution" would hurt his reputation more than anything else by a long shot!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Gift authorship is unethical. At my institution it is explicitly forbidden by policy. Check if your institution has a similar policy; you may be able to use that as justification for your request.
Also, since you made a minor contribution, I would ask him to simply put your name in the acknowledgments. If he's worried the editor will view this change badly, you can offer to write a note to the editor explaining that you requested the change.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/24 | 1,280 | 5,314 | <issue_start>username_0: **What minimal responsibilities can a student expect from their day-to-day supervisor?**
In my institute, we usually have the head of the institute as the formal supervisor, followed by another day-to-day supervisor. In fact, the head of the institute does nothing, and the day-to-day supervisor is the one who is supposed to do the PhD supervision.
A few institutions do codify the responsibilities of advisors and supervisors. See, for example, the ["Code of Practice for Supervisors, Advisors and Research Degree Candidates"](http://www.gsu.uts.edu.au/policies/codeofpractice.html) from the University of Technology in Sydney, Australia, and the ["Policies and Guidelines on Graduate Student Advising and Supervision"](https://www.mcgill.ca/study/2015-2016/university_regulations_and_resources/graduate/gps_gi_guidelines_policies_grad_student_advising_supervision) from McGill University in Canada. Are these guidelines universal?<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is reasonable to expect two things from a day-to-day PhD advisor. The first is a willingness to meet in a timely manner and discuss expectations and the second is a willingness to deliver on agreements in a timely manner. If there is something you need/want from your day-to-day PhD advisor, then ask him/her about it. If you are concerned that your request is unreasonable, then ask colleagues or here.
The problem with answering the question in general is summed up in the
[UTS link](http://www.gsu.uts.edu.au/policies/codeofpractice.html) you provided:
>
> At the outset it is important to acknowledge that the nature of the
> student-supervisor relationship cannot be mandated, largely because it
> needs to be flexible and take into account the particular
> circumstances of the research project, the student and the supervisor.
>
>
>
As far as the universality of formal guidelines about expected behavior in regards to advising students, all universities provide a faculty handbook that has some minimal guidelines, but generally it is not as long or formal as the links you provided.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: *Based on my experiences...*
Based on those I know, the guidelines you link to are *not* general.
The day-to-day supervisor approach is typically implemented passively because the main supervisor (i.e., the guy in absentia most of the time) is too busy to actually manage the students. For this approach to be practical, the day-to-day supervisor must have expertise in your research and must be aware of the general research path of the group (i.e., can provide not only advice but direction).
For what it's worth, most labs with a day-to-day supervisor in addition to the main one will be more difficult to work in as a graduate student. The only case where this can be a benefit is where the formal advisor is some ridiculously well-known figure in the field, and your just being in their lab will lead to opportunities down the road. For the majority of labs with this setup, though, it's simply because the formal advisor is too busy to deal with (or otherwise disintereted) the graduate students, and has set up someone else to deal with them. This typically leads to communication issues, lack of guidance, long delays in your advisor reviewing your work & publications, and frustration. I would approach these setups cautiously.
---
*Edit based on comments:* The main reason these setups tend to fail is that the supervisor's unspoken job description is one that will never be filled; replicate the domain expertise and research experience of the advisor while essentially being a graduate student counselor. Anyone who can do that will be running their *own* lab, not helping you manage your students.
This means that those who *do* take the job either don't have the relevant domain expertise to adequately answer student questions, or relevant research experience to design, run, and analyze data from a complete research project. Any lacking expertise translates into "lets just wait until your next advisor meeting", which adds long delays to *everything*.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll add that Guidelines, Codes, and the like are almost meaningless in academia, simply because it is easier to herd cats that to get a bunch of independent, highly-intelligent group of people to follow some set protocol or rules. Try attending a faculty meeting and you'll see what it's like. An institution may have guidelines, but there is probably very little chance of enforcing them.
You'll find supervisors/advisors on both ends of the spectrum. Some will want to be in the day-to-day operations, micro-managing all the details. Some will meet with you, then say "Come back in a few weeks when you have progress". The most common method seems to have weekly meetings to discuss progress and provide insight/expectations on advancing the project.
This is the interesting part about academia. You aren't really taught how to supervise others, or people skills in general. Most academics seem to just go with their instinctive, personality inclinations, or they simply do what their previous supervisors/advisors did.
I'll add that if you're not getting along with your supervisor, either you need to discuss the problems, or plan a move.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/25 | 1,178 | 4,586 | <issue_start>username_0: I am very new to this grad school process and currently overwhelmed to the point of tears.
I graduated from <NAME> with a degree in Sociology in 2010. I was also admitted to Alpha Kappa Delta that year. I was a teaching assistant for 2 classes and had a 3.28 gpa overall but a higher gpa in just sociology.
I took time off to earn money and just give myself a break. I work as a babysitter, make pretty decent money, and I enjoy what I do but I want to go back to grad school now. I have no research experience, I am currently studying for the GRE, reading up on some information and I honestly don't know where to start or if I have a snowball's chance in a furnace of getting in anywhere.
I would like to go back Fall 2014 (giving myself time) and I am looking at programs like Cornell, Rutgers, and Syracuse (probably more as time goes on) and thinking the only way I am getting into any of those is if the faculty has pity on me. I feel I am intelligent and could do grad work, I just don't know how I can prove to admissions I can so they will let me in. I'd really like a Ph.D but if I have to start off with a masters to get into the school, I will. Although my fear of asking this question is currently taking over since I fear someone will squish my dream of grad school like a slow moving spider, if I don't ask, I won't be able to go forward since I don't know where to begin...
Honest advice or information would be much appreciated. I want to go to grad school and I am willing to find ways to make that happen, just no idea where to begin.
Thank you so very much ahead of time...^^<issue_comment>username_1: The first advice I have to give you is perhaps the most important: in the immortal words of *The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy,* **DON'T PANIC**.
First, identify the schools to which you'd be interested in applying. You should find a reasonable number (6 plus or minus 2 is typical), and plan on some "long shots," some "typical" schools for you, and one or two schools which you would have as a "fall back" option—in case none of the "long shots" and "typicals" work out for you.
You should also find people who can write letters of support for you. This is perhaps the hardest part for you. Luckily, you've finished relatively recently, so you should be able to find people in academia who can write some letters of support for you. If you have a few people such as employers who can vouch for your work ethic, that could also work.
Doing well on the GRE will also help, but it isn't likely to make a huge difference except in "borderline" cases.
One thing that might help your case is to get directly into contact with people at the various schools you'd be interested in attending. If you can organize a meeting with some of the faculty there and present your case in person, that can leave a more positive impression than just submitting an application "cold."
The other thing you can do to help your case is to have a *clear and compelling explanation* for what you want to do, and why you feel a master's or a PhD is the right way to accomplish those goals. I see far too many applications from candidates who otherwise might be viable who can't elucidate a single reason to go to graduate school beyond. Having a compelling plan can go some ways toward convincing skeptical faculty members that you are serious about graduate studies.
In addition, you can consider all of [the advice about getting a bad transcript past admissions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/324/how-do-you-get-a-bad-transcript-past-ph-d-admissions) as additional suggestions for how to proceed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me recommend to you <NAME>'s [Advice for Undergraduates Considering Graduate School](http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/grad-school.html). This essay is about 12 pages, with sections such as "What is Graduate School?", "Do I want to go to Graduate School?", "Research", "Applying to Graduate School", "Letters of Recommendation", and "Getting Accepted to Graduate School".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Check this site, which is supported by the Andrew Ng (of Coursera and machine learning class fame) : <http://graddecision.org/> this will walk you through entire process and has lot of good information and advice.
Basically figure out where you want study and why that school, prepare a kickass Statement of Purpose(SOP) and contact your professors for letter of recommendations(LOR). And yes, give GRE soon as deadlines mostly in December.
All the best :D
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/25 | 1,106 | 4,638 | <issue_start>username_0: One of my students is an escort/stripper and she has offered me (and other faculty in my department) her "services". I am pretty sure my initial reaction of "thanks for letting me know, now can you answer the question about how to calculate the standard deviation", may not have been the best reaction. The offers have continued. My head of school is aware of the issue, and has asked if I want him to do anything.
Is the student doing anything wrong by offering her services to me? For what it is worth, prostitution is legal in the UK. Is this any different then a student telling me she works in a restaurant?
What is the correct response in a situation like this?<issue_comment>username_1: First, *“thanks for letting me know”* is not an unambiguous **no**. I suppose most people would actually get it, but she already appears to have boundary issues, so you should make it much clearer. The best thing to do would be to make it clear to her that you consider **her propositions to be out of line**. You can add, that while you don't think badly of her because of it, **such offers have no place in the classroom** (or in a student/teacher relationship).
In fact, you would probably do the same if she insisted on asking you to come have dinner at a restaurant she worked at: you'd be annoyed by it, because it is detrimental to her (and others) attention. I regularly have students who ask out-of-line questions, and I try to be firm: while I'd be happy to discuss if we were friends, we are not and my class/practicals/whatever is not the right place for that.
However, there is a distinction between talking about sex and dining: the law makes a distinction in many countries, including UK. From UCL's HR webpages (as an example):
>
> Sexual harassment can take the form of ridicule, sexually provocative remarks or jokes, offensive comments about dress or appearance, the display or distribution of sexually explicit material, unwelcome sexual advances or physical contact, demands for sexual favours or assault.
>
>
>
which clearly covers your case, whether the sexual advances are of a paid or an unpaid nature.
Finally, regarding your head of school: **the student clearly has boundary issues**, probably for making the offer in the first place and definitely for renewing it multiple times after you declined. So, yeah, **I would suggest your head of school or a counselor having a talk with her about it**.
Upvotes: 9 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think her offer is more than just a simple bribing. It is an intentional act to jeopardize your career and put you in trouble. Unfortunately it is a method used by some women to disturb and manipulate men and when they get disappointed they can easily pretend they are the victims of sexual abuse. Due to the fact that sexual relationships between people are not as simple as other relationships, her offer cannot be compared with inviting you to a restaurant. I think it is better you not only reject her offer but also report her offer and try to document it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Your initial reaction was *thanks for letting me know, now can you answer the question about how to calculate the standard deviation*.
This answer is ambiguous and at risk for misunderstanding. I guess you mean *no*, but you're not saying *no*. If taken literally, this answer says neither *yes* nor *no*. Myself, earlier in my life, would have interpreted *thanks for letting me know* as an expression of interest, which explains the repeated offers. In sensitive cases like this, I think it's important to be very explicit:
*I am not interested in your professional services and please do not offer them again.*
Like this, at least it is beyond doubt that you have replied negatively.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: From what you say, the student's actions are not illegal in your country. Most people, including most administrators of educational institutions, would consider this "wrong." The reason is very simple; it could constitute bribery, or a at least a conflict of interest. Apparently, this has happened to a number of people, your university is "wise," and is willing support you (and others).
The next time it happens, give her an uequivocal "no," and tell her that you don't expect to have to tell her again. You might add that you are "happily married" or "in a good relationship" if that is the case. The "second next time," you might threaten to report her to the university. In any event, whatever you do, make it clear that her behavior is inappropriate, and will not be tolerated.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/25 | 1,146 | 5,102 | <issue_start>username_0: I've noticed that while there's no alternative to going through the actual paper in detail, it often helps if I've gone through the presentation based on the paper, which the authors had used while publishing their papers. (Mostly because, the few presentations on TCS papers that I've seen have good geometric examples/illustrations which may have been instrumental in getting the intuition in the first place, but the brevity required by CS conferences mean very few of them make it to the published paper!)
While a few authors graciously maintain the links of such slides on their web-pages, most do not - and I haven't even seen a single CS conference maintaining such documents on their web-page!
So, I've the following questions:
1. Since I'm ultimately interested in understanding their work (and extending it if possible), is it considered OK to email the authors for the slides (if they still have it)?
2. If it is, do I have to justify/explain why I want the slides, or would just a polite request do (with minimal explanations on my part to keep the mail short!)?
3. Would making such a request more than once make the author feel offended, and/or make them think that someone who can't read papers at the highest level without "assistance" isn't exactly someone worth helping out?
4. If there are 2 authors listed, without any implications about who is the corresponding author, should I mail both of them at the same time (which may lead to both of thinking the other would be responding), or separately (which may lead to duplication of efforts!)?
I'm not sure what to tag this query with - feel free to re-tag/add more tags as you see fit!<issue_comment>username_1: 1. It's never a problem to ask. In particular if you are interested in extending their work, they should be interested in providing you with more information. Perhaps the extension will happen in collaboration with them, but at the very least you're going to cite their paper. In my experience, views on sharing slides vary, but the objections I've heard related to unpublished material; I understand that in your situation, the material is already published.
2. I would explain why. It's polite to do so. But do keep the mail short. You could write that if they're interested, you can provide more details on your ideas; like that, you don't swamp them with unrequired information, yet you're open from your side in stating your ideas. Such an offer shows that you trust them, and as they need some trust in you if they share their slides, that is probably a good idea.
3. I don't think they would feel offended.
4. Depends on the field. If there is no clear first or corresponding author, I would contact either one of them. They would probably either reply or forward the e-mail to the other author.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. I think it is reasonable to make such a request but your success will depend on how it is done. If you clearly express your interest and reason for asking as well as express your understanding if they were to decline, you have made a humble request which should not offend anyone. If you can I think it would be even better to try to talk to the person directly (putting a face on the request). This takes some guts but is clearly worth it if you think you have significant use for the results of the paper. If you get a no, you might be able to ascertain what the reasons of the no might be, there might be personal or copyright reasons.
2. The answer to this is perhaps given by 1 already. Yes, short but with enough details to give the person the clear reasons why you would benefit from the presentation.
3. Turning it into a habit is probably not advisable unless the person you ask becomes more of a mentor than just a source for information. I think most people want something back and perhaps admiration might just not be enough.
4. I would say, yes, contact both with the same mail. Sending two separate requests would probably just be seen as fishy.
So in short, be brief clear and polite in your request and be honest about your reasons for the request. Just remember that the response will vary from person to person so there is no guarantee for success in every case.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Unless there are reasons that a presentation is considered proprietary (the ground rules of the conference, or it occurred in a non-conference setting, such as a presentation at a corporation or program review), it is unlikely to be a problem to email the presenter for a copy of the slides.
A short note with the email indicating where you saw the presentation, and why you're interested in it, is never remiss, as it shows active interest in the researchers work. With respect to how often to ask, I'd wait a few weeks between requests; otherwise, you will be seen as being a bit too "pushy."
With respect to coauthors, usually the first author is the presenter, unless otherwise indicated. It's probably best to contact the first author initially, and then move to additional coauthors if there's no response.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/26 | 979 | 4,398 | <issue_start>username_0: I don't know how to start, truly, but lately I've been involved with some projects in pure mathematics and I've grown frustrated and disappointed. I don't think that pure mathematics is so inspiring; my intent is to move on to study some applied math but most teachers in my department aren't that dedicated to it. All I see are theoretical approaches to problems "that applied sciences may be interested some day".
By talking to a colleague of mine who is seriously considering moving on from Math to Physics, he told me of some engineering departments who might accept someone with a master's degree in their Phd programs. There are some areas I like that might have a connection with what is studied in some Engineering Phd programs, like applied ODE and Dynamical systems and I'd love to put some programming on what I do.
But every teacher I talked about this so far tells me to avoid this kind of migration, since it brings a loss of academic focus and it might be hard for me to find a job later as a teacher. There is no strong tradition in Mathematical Engineering as there is in other countries (I know that such courses exists in Italy and some other European contries).
So I'd like to know some thoughts from more seasoned students and researchers out there. Any advice is welcome.<issue_comment>username_1: Most CS graduate programs would be quite happy to admit a math major. It might be tricky early on if you have zero programming experience, but depending on the kind of work you're interested in, you could be in a strong position.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have been in your shoes, as I migrated from mathematics to computational engineering. While my math background gave me some advantage, I remember it was difficult to make the transition because I was very unfamiliar with a lot of the key concepts in engineering. What really helped me was watching online courses (MIT, IIT, etc...) in the material I was missing... Of course, I had an entire year to prepare for it. If you have a lot of time to make the transition, by all means do so and you shouldn't have "too much" trouble. But if you're pressed for time to make up for a lack of engineering background, it can be quite overwhelming. It's best to hit the ground running in graduate school.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The most likely domain of interface for a mathematician with engineering would be in the realm of "computational engineering," in which numerical algorithms are used to study physical and engineering systems. This work is highly interdisciplinary, and requires close collaboration among all of the different researchers involved, as very few are experts in all of the areas with which they are concerned.
However, there *is* a certain amount of logic to the idea of staying in one's "home" discipline. It makes it easier to figure out "who you are," which can make starting your career a bit easier. One possibility might be to pursue a degree in *applied* mathematics, in which you study problems relevant to engineering, rather than remaining in "pure" mathematics. This might be a reasonable compromise that keeps you in the mathematics field, while still allowing you to pursue topics in areas that interest you more.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The only problem with switching to a particular field of engineering is that you'll be missing a core set of knowledge particular to that discipline that will hinder your progress for a while. For instance, you would probably do great in many electrical engineering sub-diciplines, but if you've never taken a circuits or signals course, you're going to be lost for a while before you can learn that material.
If you already have research experience, that will count for a lot, but I would suggest finding an engineering program that would allow you to take a few undergraduate courses during your first year or two in order to get up to speed. If you find a professor that is looking for a mathematics-savvy graduate student to fill in the gaps in his/her lab, that might be the best way to get your foot in the door. You've got skills that could be very valuable to the right lab, and if you use those as leverage to join a particular lab/research team, you'll be able to fill in the missing pieces to your new field and move forward with your own degree.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/02/26 | 1,803 | 7,444 | <issue_start>username_0: I have worked in a few high profile research institutes for my PhD and postdoc, and find myself a little intimidated by the "strong opinions" and arguments that seem to crop up at the principal investigator level. My personality is somewhat more laid back or agreeable, and I find myself wondering if this would be seen as a "personality flaw" in the somewhat cutthroat funding and scientific world (or at least that part I am exposed to). I'm sure it helps to have a strong opinion of one's own work, but I sometimes find it hard to do so, as I tend to be more self-critical and more concerned about stating something correctly and figuring out what is "right" than necessarily being self-promoting and overconfident in my own abilities, but I feel like that ends up manifesting as some sort of fundamental flaw in relation to others I see advancing into the faculty ranks.<issue_comment>username_1: I am sure a psychologist could provide an indepth analysis to a large part of this question. I am not a psychologist so I will try to stick to what I think I can answer. First, it is usually the big and loud heads that stick out and are seen, there are probably just as many quieter academics in similar positions that you do not see or hear.
I am sure it is possible to talk yourself into a top position but not without showing excellence in your science, usually reflected in a publication record and funding success (sadly to a lesser extent teaching). But, the academic record on paper is typically what counts and it would only be in an interview situation between two equally talented candidates that things can be swung. But even then, I do not think the ego would necessarily have an advantage. Then there is the question what happens after you are employed and how one develops as a person but that is out of scope for me.
A problem more timid persons experience is to strike the right tone in pushing ones own merits. Taking advice from entrusted clleagues is a good way forward. But, as a whole a "big ego" in the negative sense is not necessary, a good academic record is.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think a "big ego", or at least a healthy dose of self confidence, is necessary for survival as an academic. Our jobs are one of repeated failure. Success rates on grants, publications, experiments, and job applications are often less than 10%. In the face of such frequent failures an abundance of confidence is a require for maintaining ones sanity. Further, many departments verge on dysfunctional and there is generally someone looking to push you down to get ahead (I am not saying everyone is out to get you, but there is generally at least one person in every department looking to get ahead at your expense.) Being confident, outspoken and to an extent self prompting is useful for dealing with these people. The difficult part is not being too self confident and too outspoken and being able to admit when you are wrong.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It's important to distinguish inner from outer perspectives here. Someone that is perceived as 'having a big ego' might not feel that way inside, and might be compensating for a bad case of [Imposter Syndrome](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome). Or they just might have a big ego through and through :).
As others have pointed out, what you really need is a thick skin, in order to deal with the constant rejection you'll face (jobs, papers, grants, awards, ...). You can acquire a thick skin by having a big ego ("People are too stupid to appreciate my genius") or by being bull-headed ("I don't care what people think: I think this is interesting"), or by other coping mechanisms. This is an **internal** focus: it doesn't matter what you show on the outside.
Occasionally though, it's helpful to *project* an aura of confidence and assuredness, most commonly when you're interviewing, or when you're psyching yourself to write a grant or pitch a project. Again, this is an **external** focus: it doesn't matter how you feel on the inside.
Ultimately, you'll (hopefully) find a harmonious balance between what you project to the outside world, and how you feel on the inside. They don't have to necessarily be the same view though: they rarely are.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: You don't need an ego. In fact, ego just makes life more difficult in many ways. All you need is to able to project confidence, and the ability to assert yourself. A simple ability to stand your ground and stand behind your opinions, even if quietly so.
Think about the guy or gal you know who doesn't talk too loudly but everyone listens when he or she speaks. Try to emulate *that* person, not the egos in the room. People generally dislike people with big egos, but they love people with genuine confidence. People will respect the hell out of you for it.
There are many resources online regarding how to project confidence--I suggest looking there.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: A "big ego" is definitely not necessary. Of all the scholars I have interacted with, the biggest-shots were often less egotistical than the average person. Especially at the highest levels of academia, the strongest work often comes from those who are willing and able to listen to and improve on the ideas of others.
However, you do need to make yourself heard. You do need to be bold. I do not know a single successful tenure-track person who sits on ideas until they are sure that they're right. You don't find out an idea is right by mulling it over. You find out by formulating the problem rigorously, by testing a hypothesis, and by subjecting it to the most scathing peer-review you can find (not necessarily in that order, as you might do some of these steps multiple times). There's no harm in being self-critical or unsure that you're right. There is harm when that hinders you from taking the necessary steps to find out if you're right.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Academia, as many other fields, is the survival of the fittest game. If you see PIs with big egos (or rather if most of the PIs you see have big egos), then it means that this is the personality trait that academia cultivates, albeit unknowingly, implicitly and subversively.
Academia is a race against time -- if you hesitate about your research idea for too long, and wait to perfect it, you will either be scooped, or will run out of your time in your (presumably rather junior) position. Submitting something that is just "good enough not to disgust the three referees" that you yourself know isn't the greatest paper, and getting it published, gets you the confirmation of "Aha, I am a smart enough person to game the system". Then you learn to salami-slice it to boost your # of publications; then you learn to attribute collaborative teamwork to yourself when your chair asks you, "How many papers have you published this year?" -- all these things sound a lot like "I, me, myself", and occasional big carrots (your R01 grant; your tenure) are obviously about **you**. When you do this for 20 years in a row, your skin gets so thick that it looks very much like a big ego from outside.
Don't worry, you will see big egos in most other fields at the higher levels -- think real estate development and golf, which are closely intertwined, anyway; you would not find folks in these lines of work very approachable.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/26 | 1,768 | 7,370 | <issue_start>username_0: When meeting some scientists in person, I've had good conversations with decisions upon interesting plans for research cooperation and personal visits. But then, subsequent contact by e-mail is difficult, where the other party either doesn't reply at all, or very slowly (several weeks +). However, when I then meet them again at a later date, they are still enthusiastic about the project (where the bulk of the work is mine) and a short in-person discussion makes more progress than the past months of (lack of) e-mail have. So it appears that a lack of interest in the project does not explain the lack of response. The project is scientifically interesting, fits with my PhD, and the visit enhances my chances of finding a post-doc after my PhD (it's a very good institute for my field).
I understand that many scientists are very busy and flooded by e-mail, but it feels sad to abandon a potentially interesting project just because communication by e-mail is not working well. I'm quite sure it would work if I were in the same building. What strategies exist to mitigate this problem? I can think of:
1. Try to ask a common acquaintance to poke him/her (my local colleague has a shared friend with him/her). Pro: Might get indirect feedback as to why the irresponsiveness. Con: involves 3rd party (may or may not be on-site) not necessarily involved.
2. Send reminder e-mails (*did you see my e-mail from 20 February?*). Pro: increases chances of being noticed. Con: may be considered annoying
3. Phone. Pro: hard to run away. Con: I don't like phoning and I don't like being phoned.
4. E-mail someone sitting in the neighbouring office. Pro: neighbour has small step to irresponsive scientist. Con: a bit strange to involve someone I don't even know
5. Give up on the project. Con: means no project and no visit.
6. Try to do the project without their input. Pro: no need for communication. Con: might waste a lot of time by trying known dead-ends that I'm not aware of.
What other options exist? What advantages and disadvantages have I not thought of? What is wise to do?<issue_comment>username_1: First: that situation is common. Actually, that situation is *very* common. You listed a large number of options that come to mind, let's discuss them a bit:
1. For me, that's the best.
2. Reminders don't cost you much, but they can only go so far before you risk being annoying.
3. **I would strongly advise phone or Skype**. Don't get me wrong: I hate phone too. It has the inconveniences of both verbal communication (you need to reply fast, and have no time to smith your words precisely) and written communication (you don't see the other person's face and non-verbal indicators). However, it helps if people are unresponsive to email. Also, consider that maybe *they* like phone better than email (some people do!).
As I said, Skype (or any video-chatting tool) might be a useful alternative to phone. Some people hate it, some people love it, so be sure to ask if they would consider it.
4. **No**. You can ask a friend or common acquaintance to poke them, but don't use someone you don't know well. **Unless it's their job**, of course: if you communicate with a big boss or dean or whatever, it is fine to use his personal assistant or secretary to check up on things or remind him of deadlines.
5. and 6. It's your choice to make, not much we can say here.
---
To your (already good ideas) I would add an important one:
7. **Set yourselves** (or give him) **a goal and a deadline**. On one occasion where you actually meet him, use his enthusiasm to set an (achievable) goal, possibly with an associated deadline: decide that you want to present this work at this occasion, or submit to a given special issue that has a deadline in 6 months, or want to have the project finished by September to hire a post-doc with funding from the John Doe Foundation, …
Whatever the deadline is, it will spur contributions from his side. The research environment puts people under a lot of pressure with bureaucracy and deadlines. If your project doesn't have any visible deadline, he will never get it done. So, create one, even if it's more of a pretext. Then use that deadline as a hammer!
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I recognize this all too well and I do not have a patented solution. This is in part because the reasons will vary from case to case. I have found that collaborations will be easier in two cases: The first is when the collaborator is driven by their own agenda and can see a strong personal gain apart from the collaboration. This might seem a poor excuse for a collaboration but, I think, reflects the stress most are under. The second is when you strike up a true friendship and simply enjoy each others comåany apart from the science. This should not be underestimated even if it is hard to chose collaborators based on such premises. Over to the answer.
If you think you have a collaborator where a mutual interest to collaborate exists according to the above, the best way is to arrange to visit for a couple of weeks. This can be folowed up by a returnvisit at some stage. Under suchcircumstances you can work in relative pace and you can set up short and unintrusive meetings under a short period with your collaborator. Such a visit can be preceded by some homework but expect to do most yourself if the initiative is yours.
A visit is certainly possible in all other cases as well but if the personal chemistry/interest is not strong to begin with, I do not know how successful you will be. Uncertain in any case. You will also likely end up doing most of the work throughout the process.
The bottom line is that unless the project (paper) is priority one on everyones list, you run the risk of not getting much response and certainly not much drive from your collaborators. It just seems to be the nature of things. I am sorry if this sounds negative but the times when I have done work during visits (going away or receiveing a visit) have seen a much higher success rate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the fine answers here already, I've found helpful to get the ball rolling to *do work on my own* and then send that along to the colleague.
It seems to me that often a substantial block is if project has some ambiguity, and if a person can't devote a large amount of time to it they will put it off in favor of more concretely defined goals. Doing some work on your own can frequently help to refine the goals of the project and how the collaborator fits in.
Obviously you can't do the whole project on your own and need feedback, but often there are substantial amounts of work you can do on your own. A literature review, an extensive outline, writing particular sections of a paper, preliminary data analysis etc. are almost always good candidates.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: One point that I would like to stress is to set a new date for a live/skype/phone talk at the end of each meeting. In this way you avoid having to email someone for a new date, and you minimise the risk of your communication dying down until the next live meeting. There is still the risk of the appointment getting rescheduled, but at least a rescheduled appointment is more concrete than waiting for an email back that never shows up.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/26 | 965 | 4,197 | <issue_start>username_0: Suppose after graduating from a PhD program, you don't do a post-doc. Are the chances of getting a tenure-track position severely reduced? Also is it possible to do a post-doc after a completion of a masters program (probably should be called a "post-masters")?<issue_comment>username_1: What people expect from a candidate for a tenure-track faculty position is the ability to guide research and to set up an independent research group. The candidate will have to prove extensive (almost) independent research experience and a research vision to last for many years. A post-doc candidate will be stronger in these requirements than someone just graduating with a PhD. It is not impossible to get a tenure-track position directly after the PhD, but I think chances are better with a post-doc.
Nevertheless, if you just graduated and there is a position announced which fits your profile, by all means apply for it. Even if you're not successful, it may give you valuable experience.
All types of faculty positions I know of have a formal PhD requirement, so usually it is not useful to skip that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Let us start from a different perspective. What is required to get a tenure-track position?
I would say that two things are primarily used as criteria in the selection process: number of publications and ability to secure funding. Related to the publication list is of course aspects of publications, publication rate number of citations and the impact factor of the journals in which you publish. Exactly how these aspects are weighted is varying. Note that rates are important so it is not exclusively a matter of pure numbers.
In both cases time is an aspect and obviously you will standa a better chance the more merits you can accumulate which takes time. I do not know what other possibilities might exist to get some time to improve your merits. In some cases you might be temporarily hired to do teaching. Teaching will of course also be a merit but not on the expense of research. and under such circumstances contnued research output may be a challenge. So obviously a Post-Doc should give you a head start but I would not see it as an exclusive prerequisite.
"Post-Master": Since this concept does not formally exist, I could see there being opportunities to partake in research by being a lab-assistant or something similar. Any opportunity to widen your experience and possibly getting you into the research activities, especially publishing would be beneficial fo r the future.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The purpose of a postdoctoral fellowship is simply to gain the skills detailed in [this answer to a similar question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/3328/73), notably:
* Get involved with obtaining funding
* Build an international reputation
* Start collaborating with external parties
* Learn how to manage projects and a lab
* Start to devise a strategic research plan
* Improve your publication record
If you have all those things from your work as a graduate student, then you should have no problem finding employment and furthering your academic career immediately after you earn your PhD. Most students don't, which is why they try to find a postdoc position to help them gain these skills before attempting to run their own lab.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Currently, I believe this is a very field-dependent issue. In physics, for instance, it would not be possible to get a faculty position without a postdoc (or even *two* postdocs) unless you're an Einstein-level talent. In some fields, such as engineering, it may still be possible to get a position directly after a PhD—but in such cases that candidate is usually told to take a year or two, do a postdoc, and *then* start the faculty position.
However, I think that it is in general a *very* bad idea to just "take some time off" if one is planning to pursue a faculty position. Working in industry or doing something that keeps one active in research is probably OK, but a "sabbatical" that doesn't contribute toward a CV in any way will likely set off some hackles on the part of the search committee.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/02/26 | 810 | 3,433 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm interested in knowing what percentage of math phds actually succeed in landing a tenure track academic job?
Also, does a phd from [AMS Group 1](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/group_i) guarantees you an academic job in top universities? If not what other factors come in to role to play?<issue_comment>username_1: **No.** No one single factor guarantees you an academic job in a top university. Whether or not you land such a job is a combination of many things. These include,
* talent
* hard work
* motivation
* quality of research
* quality of teaching
* ability to network and get along with people
* ability to communicate (both orally and in writing)
* success in securing external funding
* luck.
If you want such a job, here's what I recommend. Choose an area that you're passionate about, go to the best school (most challenging and "highest rated") that you can get into, and work with an adviser with a strong publication record. At each step along the way, surround yourself with (and learn as much as you can from) the most successful people possible.
You can find a partial answer to your question about percentage by reading the annual Survey of the Mathematical Sciences (by the American Math Society):
<http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/annual-survey>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As I said in the comments: The success rate of the population will tell you little about YOUR chances of success. You are better off focusing on ways to improve YOUR chances.
To answer the second part of the question, most hiring committees at top universities for tenure track jobs primarily considered your publication record, your ability to secure funding, and your fit to the department. The fit to the department is tricky. It generally includes either research area or ability to teach a class, but may also include departmental politics. Sometimes an applicant can be such a poor communicator (often discovered during the interview) or be a known pain in the ass that this can influence the decision, but generally the decision is based on publications, money and fit. I would venture to say that more often than not the rankings do not chance based on the interviews/campus visits.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I understood in the Netherlands somewhere around 5% ends up in a research position. This also includes people who after their PhD leave academia, so the percentage for those willing to continue is a bit higher. Ofcourse, as others already said, these general statistics do not say what your chances are, but it does illustrate that it is hard to find a position. In the Netherlands, it is important to get, apart from a good publication record, into a prestigious grants system (Venice, Vidi, Vici system). The first step is essentially a prestigious postdocs, the second leads to assistant professorship (fixed position), and the final one to full professorship. Getting into such a winning streak is important, successful projects make it easier to get new ones, I.e. the successful become more successful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: An additional parameter to consider is **fashion**: some research fields are deemed sexy and some aren't (and that assessment changes with time unpredictably!), and your chances of finding a position depend on the current perception of your field by the senior faculty.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/26 | 1,263 | 5,705 | <issue_start>username_0: I was recently going through an article (which I was told is fundamental in the area of my new project) published in a respectable medical journal. In short, the paper is about the similarities between a particular sub-type of tumor cells versus a particular type of stem cells in the body, then they go on to investigate what that similarity might indicate.
Barely two pages in and I realize that the authors omit what I consider to be critical data when motivating the use of two particular proteins as markers in establishing their fundamental assumption, that their immunohistochemistry findings are representative of the reality and that their model is valid:
>
> *Accordingly, we screened all known ..... markers against our ..... data to determine which, if any, decrease with differentiation (data not shown). Of all the potential ... markers, we found that X and Y are the best candidates, and they were therefore used in this study.*
>
>
>
Now it might not be a big deal to some but I find it important to see that omitted data, since:
1. I am not that informed in that particular type of biology
2. Seeing that their "real" findings are built on the results of the aforementioned screening, the validity of their research is practically depending on the decision of using those two markers.
Which brings me to my question: **Are there any cases where not showing "critical" data in such a manner is acceptable or common?** I know that some journals do not accept "data not shown", but obviously it does happen in better journals as well...<issue_comment>username_1: *Critical data*? Probably not. But, I have seen many papers with data left out simply because of paper length restrictions, and in all cases other graphs and data appropriately contributed to the papers' fundamental arguments.
In the cases where I wanted to see the data that was omitted, I've written one of the authors and they have almost always forwarded it along.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is of course difficult to judge this particular paper without having seen it so I will stick to general terms.
I do not see any reason for not representing all data in some form. When I say represent I mean that the complete data set can be given in terms of, for example, statistical measures which would at least provide some way to see or judge whether the subset shown is truly representative. But, I still have a hard time seeing a good reason for omitting it without clearly explaining on what grounds.
Journals allow supplementary information and so it seems reasonable to use that option if it exists in th eparticular journal. In very old papers where plots were mae by hand, there may be some excuse if not everything is included.
As I see it one of the fundamental principles of scientific publication is reproducibility. That requires access to all data. There are of course instances where this i snot possible such as when patient journals are involved.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think it is perfectly reasonable to not "show" data. For example, consider a multivariate randomized control trial with two groups. If there are a large number of partially correlated dependent variables, the data are not suitable for graphical or tabular presentation. What we are potentially interested in is if there is a difference between the two groups. We can "see" that from a single sentence about a statistical test and a comment that the data are not shown (so people do not go looking to find the figure).
In a biology example, maybe you are counting the number of intact cells after two different treatments. There may be hundreds of slices that result in two numbers. What exactly do you want to see?
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: From the way you've described it, it sounds like the choice of markers was somewhat arbitrary. Presumably they had figures that demonstrate that the markers they *did* choose are good at marking whatever-it-is that needs to be marked. Thus, the fact that they looked at howevermany others is immaterial to the scientific content of the paper and is rightly omitted.
Now, that data could well be useful to someone else for whom markers X and Y are inadequate (maybe because of expression problems or tissue type or whatever). It would be useful to the scientific community to know what that data is (if indeed it was done carefully enough to be worth anything--maybe it wasn't, but it didn't matter because X and Y checked out). But there's no requirement to be especially helpful to the rest of the community (or to avoid being sloppy in some areas as long as you go back and do it carefully/right once you know what you're doing). So it seems reasonable to me.
(Again, inferring from what you've said. If that screen was what *told* them that X and Y had the properties that they thought, and there is no other confirmation, then they'd *better* show that data in convincing detail!)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: What constitutes "data" is a highly subjective issue. If "data" means "all scientific output," in many cases this exceeds what can reasonably be shown in a paper.
In molecular simulations (my particular field), we may generate *gigabytes* or even *terabytes* of data for individual papers. This data needs to be crunched down and represented in figures that process the data and make sense of it to the reader, as it is plainly impossible to show the reader the same data over and over again. Thus, we choose to show only the most essential information, rather than deluge the reader with more information than can be handled either visually or in tabular form.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/26 | 1,366 | 5,584 | <issue_start>username_0: I notice that some universities have academic positions known as lecturers. Are these positions different from professors? Are transitions from instructors to the professor track relatively easy. This position seems similar to the adjunct professor position.
Note that I am talking about universities in the USA.<issue_comment>username_1: The terminology of positions differ from country to country. Lecturer has its origins in the British system. I know that when positions in other (non-English speaking) countries are announced internationally they may use this terminology. This is of course because each language have their own words for different positions. There is no straight translation between these systems including the system used in for example the US consisting of Assistant, Associate and Full Professors. The form of the employment also varies from country to country for historical reasons. A Lecturer is probably similar to an Assitant Professor, whether it is a permanent position or not probably varies.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, I've mostly seen the title "Lecturer" applied to non-tenure-track, mostly non-research teaching positions. For what it's worth, [wikipedia agrees with me on this](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lecturer#United_States).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In many places in the US, thinking of research-oriented universities, "lecturer" or "instructor" is not at all like assistant, associate, or full prof, and is not tenure track. "Lecturer" and "instructor" are closer to "adjunct", and are teaching-oriented. Sometimes the positions are effectively long term, but most often just year-by-year, or even term-by-term. Any transition from these positions to tenure track would be unusual, although in the more recent economic upheaval, sometimes people take such positions just to be employed for a year, waiting out the job market.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I used to be a lecturer at a university in the southwest USA. As a lecturer, I was charged with only teaching lower division undergraduate courses (freshman & sophomore level). In general, research and service is not a requirement for lecturers (unlike professors), but we are required to teach a larger load than professors. And we were generally yearly appointments with no chance of tenure.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Agreeing with the other answers, "Lecturer" is often the title given to full-time non-tenure track (i.e. contractual) faculty who typically only have instructional duties. Depending on the style of the institution, it may or may not be possible to move into the tenure-track. Lecturer, however, is not always a "dead-end". Some schools have a separate promotion system to reward and promote their non-tenure track faculty (similar to the way you would reward and promote staff). At these institutions there might be ranks, like Lecturer I, Lecturer II, Senior Lecturer, etc.
Disagreeing with the other answers, the term "adjunct" usually refers to a part-time instructor. Adjuncts usually have few if any opportunities for advancement. At many institutions, adjuncts may be distinct from Lectures (as a Lecturer is a full time appointment). My institution confusingly calls full-time and part-time instructors "Lecturer", but then proceeds to treat them as very different types of employee.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I can give the Australian context.
"Lecturer" is a rank in Australia.
The typical hierarchy is "Associate Lecturer", "Lecturer", "Senior Lecturer", "Associate Professor", "Professor" (see this [discussion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_ranks_%28Australia_and_New_Zealand%29)). Thus, on the academic ranking scale from A to E, lecturer is B.
However, it is also common for anyone who gives lectures in a university to describe their job in terms of "being a lecturer". In this sense "lecturer" is an often informal job title that may be used by an academic at any academic rank. For example, someone might ask you what you do for a living and you might answer "I'm a lecturer at a university". Such a response could be given by someone at any academic rank.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I am teaching in University (Mongolia). In our country calling every person who is teaching in university, first "Lecturer". We are starting from assistant lecturer, lecturer, senior lecturer going on. If you have PhD degree you can go to next level: Associate Professor and Professor. But in generally all calling like lecturer. If you are already in Professor position your teaching hours is reducing and increasing hours for research and projects.
Different between Lecturers and Professors in our meaning sounding like, have academic degree or not. But not every body can become Professor who have PhD degree. You have to be lead some main research direction or field, you have to write books about your field.
Big difference from European countries Professor position in our university is not lifelong. After every 3 years you have to be accredited. If you are enough good by this process you can keep your position, if not your level is reducing.
I am agree that Professor have to concentrate more to research and Lecturers can be focused for teaching.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm a staff member at an American university. Lecturers here don't take on graduate students (Research Assistants) to advise for their thesis, guiding their research, etc. which is a major component of a professor's duties and legacy.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/26 | 477 | 2,139 | <issue_start>username_0: 2 schools I applied to accepted me in early Feb.
The other schools I applied to have yet to respond and their sites say their admission decisions typically occur mid-march.
Is it accepted to contact the departments ahead of time requesting information on your app status given that you don't want to make the other schools wait too long?
My apologies if this is the incorrect forum to ask this question.<issue_comment>username_1: Most graduate schools in the U.S. follow a policy that accepted candidates are not required to make a decision until a set date agreed upon by the schools (April 15th, I believe). This means you can (and should) take as much time to make your decision as you need. It sounds like you do need to make your decision earlier than that deadline (but it might be worth finding out if the other schools do follow that policy and simply asked you to make a decision earlier), so contacting the other schools is probably a good idea.
Remember, however, you are making a decision that will at the very least directly affect the next four to six years of your life, who you work and collaborate with, future contacts, where you live, and what your future employment prospects are! So, I'll reiterate: take the time you need, and get as much information as you can if you are up against a hard deadline.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As Chris mentioned, USgraduate programs have a common deadline. International programs have different deadlines and operate on a very different system. Sometimes this is unfortunately used as a cudgel to get students to commit to a particular group by giving a short window in which the offer is valid.
That said, if you are faced with such a dilemma, I would recommend accepting the best offer you have at the time when the decisions are due. If a better offer comes along, u can reconsider your decision. You should note, however, that rescinding your acceptance is not something that is appreciated, particularly if you are planning to join a particular professor's research group as part of the admissions process.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/26 | 1,581 | 6,662 | <issue_start>username_0: I've started a PhD recently and seen a few students from other universities visit our lab for a few days or maybe few weeks. The other university pays all expenses which many times amount to thousands of dollars. Most of the time, the visiting student gets a place, brings her/his own laptop and does research the way he does it at his university.
What's the point of this? Couldn't the visiting student just stay at his university and discuss his research with our lab on Skype?
One explanation I thought of is face to face networking but the cost seems to high for that. Or it may be an excuse to travel and see the world, but that's quite ridiculous. I also asked the visiting students, but they told me they didn't know.<issue_comment>username_1: For me, one of the main goals of visiting the grad schools I was interested in was to figure out whether the location was somewhere I'd want to live for the next 5+ years. If the research is a good fit at a given school, but you'll be mugged, or miles away from civilization, or miles away from the nearest Thai restaurant, or whatever else that'd make you miserable, that's something you'll at least want to know when making your decision, and I think spending a few days at each of the places you're (seriously) considering is helpful in that regard.
Also, I think you're underestimating the value of face-to-face networking. Walking around the department, chatting with the grad students, professors, etc. you bump into is much easier than scheduling a Skype session with everyone you might conceivably talk to, and yes, there are certain non-verbal cues that you'll miss when video chatting. And the general atmosphere is something to take into account too; do the grad students seem to get along, hang out together, help one another? Does no one come to their office because the building is too depressing?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The main goal, from my experience, is the facetime with many different people. Skype is nice, but it's primarily intended for conversations with very few people. A visit allows students to to talk to many professors and students face-to-face in a short timespan, get to know the place, interact with students in a lab, and get a sense for what the place is like, something which is impossible over the 'net.
Also, this gives the university a good chance to see what the *student* is like. It's easy to look good on paper and can put on a clean shirt (pants optional) for a skype interview. It's a lot harder to keep up a fake act in front of dozens of faculty and students over a one-or-two day period.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In my experience (both sides: visiting and being where other students visit), the purpose can range all the way
* from very narrowly defined purposes, such as learning a particular technique/method
(I'm chemist. You will not learn phyico- or bio-chemical lab techniques efficiently via skype sessions)
* to "exploratory" purposes like finding out whether a collaboration is feasible and brainstorming topics.
Of course this implies that it may turn out during the stay that for some reason the initial idea is not or not yet feasible.
* Or even just networking.
>
> Most of the time, the visiting student gets a place, brings her/his own laptop and does research the way he does it at his university.
>
>
>
In my experience this happens when
* collaboration as intended turns out to be impossible early during the stay: then the best option for the student may be to use the time away from the home lab to catch up with that pile of things-to-be-done. Depending on how far away the host institute is, getting an earlier flight home plus possibly the hassle of finding some place to stay because you sublet your room and the discussion whether you will be reimbursed for a room that you leave earlier but don't get refunded for that may be out of question.
* External constraints and/or bad planning lead to the visit being just in the wrong time: I once had the option to do a visit but that was possible only during holiday time at the host institution - not that I didn't meet the people I wanted to meet, but the meetings were spread over a longer time. (I did get quite some work done off the todo list in the meantime - but I certainly was a bit "homeless" at the host institution for some of the time)
* Bad planning of the type that some supervisors decide who (student) is to visit whom (student) and when, and one or both of the directly affected people don't really have the time.
Side note: Consider the cost of
* further up the career path, people travel thousands of km for a visit of few hours.
* I had a scholarship where I was expected to put in a full day's travel to have a 1 h meeting with my mentor or give a 10 min presentation. Likewise, the mentor put in almost a full day's travel in order to have a few hours visit to my lab.
---
As for what the guest's institution gets out of that:
* Besides the obvious *chance* to successful collaboration or training on certain methods if the research stay is successful,
* it can be seen as part of the student's training (that applies particularly if e.g. a scholarship pays for the visit)
+ In a way, you have to learn how to do a research stay before becoming really efficient at that,
just like your home institution is probably not going to get that much out of your first conference visit, but without a fist, there will never be the efficient 5th conference visit.
+ Even just "living" in the hosting group will add experience how other groups handle their research life.
* Possibly, they wouldn't have gotten the student without: e.g. when I negotiated for the PhD student position, my prof threw into the deal that he would put me in contact to some other groups so I could do a research stay abroad (we did work, though, and I was paid by the hosting institution, not by my home institution)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The other answers cover your question from the student's and general research point of view pretty well. But if your question is why do *universities* encourage visiting students and student exchange, I can think of 2 reasons:
* Publicity and improvement of their international reputation
* Gaining a few more points in the university rankings (example: Times Higher
Education has criteria named 'International Outlook')
On a less utilitarian note: international collaboration is, on the long haul, generally beneficial to research (even though there are a lot of exchanges that bring much less to science than to the local nightlife sector).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/26 | 1,612 | 5,937 | <issue_start>username_0: I am the teaching assistant for a course in economics, and one of my responsibilities is marking examinations.
I had just finished marking the midterm, and the grades were very poor. The details are (approximately):
Mean: 23%
Standard Deviation: 5%
Min: 4%
Max: 68%
Number of Students: 84
Upon consultation of the professor, I was told to scale the grades. The method he had given me was to add a fixed amount to each student's grade such that the mean would be 72%.
To me, this seems to be an inadequate way to correct the distribution of grades and would be unfair to the students who did score much higher than the class mean.
My question is, **what is the best way to rescale the grades for an examination such that the it is fair to all the students in the class?**<issue_comment>username_1: There are several ways you could scale the tests. You could take the top score, make it 100%, then add the same amount to everyone's scores. You could take the average, add a certain amount to everyone's score so that the new average is some value you desire. You could have a sliding scale so those with lowest scores get most added, while those with highest scores get least added.
Without knowing the desired outcomes or what constitutes an "A", "B", or "C", it is hard to say what you should scale your scores to.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First, let's acknowledge that this was a *horrible* test. You have almost no power to discriminate between the different abilities of the students with a mean of 23% and a standard deviation of 5%.
Then you have to decide what to do. Personally, I'd decrease the weight of this test in acknowledgement that it was a poor test (or allow students the option of letting something else count for more). But if you just want to solve it numerically, there are the following constraints:
1. You can't have a top score of more than 100%
2. The mean is required to be 72%
3. You want all differences to still mean something
If you add 49% to the grades, you get a mean of 72% but your top score is now 117%. You could cap it at 90-95% or so, but the top students would be indistinguishable. So you'd have to scale back by squashing the grades also, e.g. by multiplying the difference from 23% by (28/45) to get it back in range. This will make the students distinguishable but not *meaningfully* so.
Really the best option is to change the grading scheme so that you have a higher mean and more distinction between different scores (to the extent that this is possible). For example, you can give a number of points for attempting a problem at all, a number of points for writing down anything which has a bearing on the right answer, etc..
You can just directly transform your old scores into new scores with the mean and deviation you like, however. Let `icdfG(p)` be the value at which the probability of getting a lower percentile score `p` from a Normal distribution with mean 0 and standard deviation is 1. Then you can just calculate percentiles and map
```
new score = 72 + icdfG(percentile)*10
```
or something to get a mean of 72 and a standard deviation of 10. (Your top student in a class of 84 would have a percentile of 83.5/84 if you did it this way.) Your top student would have a score of 97 under this scheme (and the second to top a score of 93)
Otherwise, you're probably best off using a nonlinear transform; `arctan` is a nice function for that since it will squash down the tails; and you probably want a SD of at least 10 not 5, so you could do something like
```
new score = 72 + 50/Pi * arctan((score - 23)/10)
```
which would give a max score if 93.5, a min score of 54.7, and one standard deviation up and down would give 79.4 and 64.6 respectively.
But again, the better options are to devalue the test as a bad test, and to change the grading scheme (an awful lot of work, but it will give fairer results).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Take the sqrt of the raw grade (present raw grade as a percent) and you will get something that looks ok.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Do exactly what he said! Not from slavish obedience but because it works surprisingly well. IOW add 49% (= 72%-23%) to each person's grade. [Actually now that I think about it...even simpler is to just add 50%. Very easy to understand.]
New scale:
Mean: 73%
Min: 54%
Max: 118%
The average is now a "low C". (Assuming normal 60-70-80-90 F-D-C-B-A boundaries.) This mean is probably a little lower than normal but is reasonable enough that you don't get cries of murder for the tough exam. (Especially since they are getting thrown a bone versus no change.) And probably the class needs some remnant of a "spanking" for doing poorly. So low C is a good mean for this individual test.
The min will be an F now but not such a killer that semester is lost for those who failed it (if they do well rest of course can pass the course, maybe even eke out a gentleman's C). And there will probably be a handful of Fs but not that many. Some failures out of a group of 84 is normal.
The student who got 68% will have an over 100% mark now. Which she probably deserves. It quells some of the complaining from the Hermione Granger types that feels slighted when the standards are lowered after they perform well and the class gets a break.
I think if you try it, you will find a very reasonable grouping into F/D/C/B/A set. Plus it has the added advantage of doing what you were told (merely as a bonus). Plus...you don't need to totally overthink this. It is one test out of a few.
One further added benefit is the simplicity. Instead of having to explain some gawdawful transform (like binning each quintile or square root of arctangents). You just have a quick difference. Easy to process for you. And easy to understand for the class. Sometimes simple better beats complicated perfect.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/02/26 | 650 | 2,851 | <issue_start>username_0: I mean both the salary a department offers to new hires and to already hired faculty members. I would prefer answers specifically about math departments, but I would also be interested in answers about departments in other STEM fields as well as other fields such as the humanities or the social sciences.
My motivation for this question came from another question I asked recently on another [website](http://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/197oit/how_do_university_math_departments_improve/). I had asked specifically how math departments improve and received the answer that with enough money, a math department could hire and keep the best researchers in some specific field. Now I'm asking here to confirm that that is indeed the case for math departments, but I am now also interested in seeing if this applies to all departments in academia in general.
**EDIT**:
I cannot give a specific criteria for "quality" as I assume this may vary from field to field. What I can say somewhat concretely, though, is that research productivity should be weighted above attention to teaching. Of course, if a department happens to have one or two extremely productive researchers in some specific field but does not offer a PhD program, then I would not considered that department a top department.<issue_comment>username_1: I know people who have changed their mind about where to go for ~20% increase in salary. It wouldn't make them go to a terrible place instead of a great one, but it was enough to weigh advantages. I also know people who have not changed their mind about where to go for a >30% increase in salary, but that this was viewed as somewhat surprising by people who heard it (given that the places were otherwise not *that* different).
Based on this very limited data set, I would speculate that in the 20-30% range you'd have substantial power to attract faculty members a tier higher than your reputation would otherwise allow.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are several main *financial* factors faculty candidates must consider when weighing offers:
* Salary and resultant standard of living
* Overall compensation package (health, retirement and pension, other benefits)
* Institutional support (resources, personnel, infrastructure)
The first two are with respect to the financial resources committed directly to the faculty member; the last is the amount of resources committed to the professor's working group. It is difficult to say how much the different factors are weighted, as this is highly subjective and personal.
However, I would caution against considering *absolute* salaries as a metric; salaries always have to be considered relative to the cost of living in one's environment. (Would you rather have $50,000 in New York City or $40,000 in Akron?)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/02/27 | 883 | 3,695 | <issue_start>username_0: I heard for the second time today that a discipline is "superfluous". This comment was made by a young assistant professor, who does not do research in this discipline. Just to be fair to the commenter, that was not a serious comment, but just a casual remark.
However, I think deep in his mind he believes that this discipline is "superfluous". And deep in my mind I have the same doubt from time to time. Can a discipline be superfluous? How do you know whether a discipline is worth researching or not?
PS: In this case this discipline is HCI (human computer interaction), but you could replace it with any other discipline.<issue_comment>username_1: Superfluous usually means unnecessary. So the person is claiming that a discipline is unnecessary. Presumably, this is a claim that can be investigated further: does research in that discipline have any kind of external impact ? does it affect other related disciplines ? Is there at least a path from the questions being asked to some future impact ?
In fact these are all good questions to ask about any discipline, whether it's deemed superfluous or not. And these are good questions to ask about one's own research in a discipline.
p.s While this is off topic, there's a common feeling among CS folks that HCI is either fluffy or superfluous. All of these people are also forbidden from using a Kinect, any video game console, a tablet interface, or even a smartphone.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The first question is open to the typical mathematician's answer: Can a discipline be superfluous? Yes, of course it *can*. More usefully however, I think there's a more nuanced version which is also interesting: can a discipline *as an academic research area* be superfluous? This is a different (though not completely disjoint question): an area can be very important, but conducting research "in it" is unnecessary.
Using your HCI example, it's clearly not superfluous in the general sense, but is it necessary to devote academics to it when there's plenty of corporations who are going to perhaps do the work anyway? (I do have an opinion here, but the phrasing here doesn't necessarily indicate it, and it's not really worth discussing in this forum.)
The second question is much, much harder though (in the general case). If you can tell, reliably, if a discipline is superfluous, you are worth a lot of money in many, many fields. The obvious example is large swathes of mathematics, sometimes the uses that make them relevant don't appear for centuries. Other areas seem really important, but produce nothing that ever proves relevant (or to really emphasise the point, *hasn't yet* proven relevant).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It's a tricky subject really... The questions are clearly very subjective, or rather any possible answer to these questions would be subjective.
For what it's worth, I *do* think that a field can be superfluous, in the meaning that a field might get outdated, or "deprecated", based on the assumption that more money (and time) invested in that field will most likely not yield any significant results. One such example I can think of is, anatomy. It used to be a critical area of research within medical faculties, but during the second half of the 1900s anatomy research has shrunk and eventually died out in many, if not all, medical research institutes.
Whether or not a field is worth researching is a HUGE question, in my humble opinion. Even deciding on whether or not a specific idea within a field is worth the trouble is tricky, and I believe it's a quality that a few of us may have, or develop after many years in research.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/02/27 | 647 | 2,826 | <issue_start>username_0: I just graduated with a Ph.D. in Asia. And I'm considering to look for a postdoc position in US in the field of computer science (to be specific, machine learning and computer vision). But I don't want to go for a faculty position (at least I don't want to at this moment) in the future. I'd prefer to find some research position in industry or some research institute in US. My question is that do you think one or two years' postdoc experience really helpful for a research career, considering it may not be that easy for an oversea student to directly get a research position in industry or research institutes?
Some of the advantages I can think of are:
1. Postdoc's supervisor's networking with other people in industry or researh institutes
2. More publications before job hunting
3. Get to know more people in my area
Hope to hear some advice from you. Thank you very much.<issue_comment>username_1: Although CS post-docs are somewhat rare compared to many other fields, you have the right idea that it is a good idea as a stepping stone for further research or faculty positions down the road. If you're willing to take a position and can find one, I don't think there are any downsides if you do indeed continue to publish and make contacts. I would also suggest broadening your search to European positions, as there are many excellent opportunities at outstanding institutions there, as well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's hard to define "helpful": yes, it's better to do a postdoc in a top place rather than staying at home, but if you want to work in research industry, it might be better to do some development for a year rather a completely unrelated postdoc in the middle of nowhere.
If you want to apply for a position, you have to understand the competition you might be facing: positions in the top research labs (public/private) are highly attractive, and you would be facing people with good achievements in academia (publications in top venues, PI for important grants, extensive network for collaboration, etc), and/or people with good achievement in industry (project managers, success for a specific product, good contact with academia, etc).
So, the question is not whether it's good or not to do a postdoc, but what will a particular postdoc bring to you:
* a different research topic, increasing your multi/inter-disciplinary skills
* a very promising research topic, potentially increasing your visibility by publishing at top venues
* a collaboration with industry, thus increasing your academia/industry network
* etc
A good approach could be to check, when available, the CVs of the people working at a research lab you could be interested to, as it could give you a good idea of what they did before joining the lab.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/02/27 | 1,918 | 7,940 | <issue_start>username_0: I have gotten an idea in the field of Computer Science that it can result in a research paper. The problem is that I lack the adequate background in one part needed for this research, mostly mathematical stuff. I have contacted one professor in Europe by email, and asked some mild questions about some topics that could be helpful. The doubt that I have is if I should better tell to that professor about my whole research idea, so maybe he/she would be able to help me more.
Actually I am a university lecturer and independent researcher, but in the university that I am working they do not give any salary or benefits for making research. I am doing this mostly because I like it.
Should I tell to that professor my whole idea? or maybe that person could steal it and because he/she has research funds can do it and leaving me aside?<issue_comment>username_1: You need to consider what role you want the math professor to take: are you looking for a co-author, a collaborator, a consultant, or a service provider.
Since you lack background in one area and are working in a place that does not prioritize publications, I would consider bring the individual on as a co-author. If that is your decision you need to provide the co-author with everything you are planning on doing so that he/she can make an informed decision. This obviously puts you at risk of being scooped. This then leads to the question of how to minimize the chances of being scooped. The first thing to remember is most researchers do not want to get into a publish first race. Scooping tends to be accidental and a result of two people independently starting the same/similar projects. You can minimize your chances by contacting an established person who is known to play "nice". The second thing you can do is to bring the research along as far as you can without the collaborator. This means they will be starting from so far back that it is unwise to enter the race.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is a common in most fields, I am not a mathematician and hear it occassionally in my field as well. The simple answer is that there are never any guarantees against that someone will/can "steal" an idea. I write quotation marks because there is a grey zone between really taking it and getting own similar ideas based on pieces of information.
One way to establish "ownership" of the idea is to provide something tangible that provides documentation of the idea with your name on it such as an abstract from a conference, poster contribution or something similar. I cannot see if this would be possible in your case, given that you say you are lacking some pieces.
Approaching another scientist to establish a collaboration is a good idea. I would not use the suspicion that the idea will be stolen as a basic assumption, the large majority of scientists do not steal ideas in my opinion. So the problem is to increase your knowledge about the person(s) you intend to contact. Does someone in your neighbourhod know the person(s)? Try to hear if they have a reputation (good or bad, no partuclar reputation is also good in my opinion). Then write and ask about the interest in collaborating, specifying what expertise you seek in the collaoration. How much you wish to reveal of your complete idea is difficult to say but you will have to provide enough detail to clearly explain why the sought expertise is required. If you then have some way to indicate the your idea is known as your idea by others, it may work as a deterrent but I would avoid being to "paranoid" in the first approach.
I do not know if this will help you in your quest but getting to know your possible contact will help to remove the unknowns which are instrumental in building your uncertainty.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't have a big academic experience yet, but would like to share what I learnt.
First of all if you have an idea you can write a technical report where you describe what you doing, what you found up to that point. If you place the technical report on the University website, you can always say that you started with the idea and you wanted to develop it to a research paper but you have a trace that it is yours. (If you don't have data and results yet, you can write technical note where you describe what you going to do)
Second thing I learned is that if you have a good name on your paper just after your one, the paper will be somehow "stronger". Probably researchers will look first for the name of a well known professor and his publications instead of your one if you don't have many. Your name should be first anyway as it is your idea. In future your paper will be cited more often and will get better score. As far as I know it is worth to have co-authors.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Collaboration (and co-authoring) is generally a good thing in science. Very few people can be a real expert in more than one field, so if you lack the skills needed to write a solid paper, recruit someone as a collaborator (but always make sure that their contribution is appropriately rewarded or other researchers won't want to work with you).
I would tell the prof that you have a good idea for a paper, but that you need to work with a mathematician and ask him/her if he/she would like to collaborate, and then decide whether to tell him/her the details once you hear what sort of terms would suit him/her. Be direct and up-front about what you want; it may not go down too well if the Prof. gets the idea that you are trying to milk them for the information you want via the "mild questions" without them getting due credit.
In my experience though, the easiest way to get a mathematician you can trust is to marry one. ;o)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You already asked him some mild questions. Obviously, you feel that the answer from him is not enough for you to go on. You need more info for you to carry out your research.
Ethically speaking, if he participates in your research, you need to give him credits for his contribution. At the very least, you need to mention him in the Acknowledgement section in your paper.
Or, you can cite his contribution in the paper. I have seen authors do this by saying some thing like
>
>
> >
> > <NAME> (private communication, 2013).
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
You can refer to [this link](http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/11/)
It would be even better to include him as a coauthor. It’s up to you.
If you want to be the single author of the paper and worry that he might steal your idea after you tell him details of your idea, then I would suggest you to
>
>
> >
> > **Narrow down the math stuff to general math only questions.**
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
You are working on CS related research, he may or may not know what you are up to. He may not even be interested in your CS subject. Most mathematicians just want to do math stuff only.
Once you can narrow down your questions to math only, not only you can ask him but also you can ask your questions on public forums such as our sister site Math SE or MathOverflow. (I see that you already asked a question on Math SE. Have you tried MO?)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: First, I strongly suggest you to study THAT yourself.
At the end of the day, if the "professor" collaborates with you, and if he made a mistake, you will be to blame as well.
Likely, the "professor" will tell you things like "sure I can help you" when in reality he will pass it to one of his PhD students.
You claim to have a Computer Science degree, right?
Then, you have some math background. Well, use that to study that for yourself. Get better on math. Do not think about the paper now, but about learning.
As a researcher you have learn so do it.
Then, if you further believe you want help, look for it.
(Maybe I can help you, btw)
Good luck :)
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/02/27 | 980 | 4,266 | <issue_start>username_0: I have my paper back from a reviewer. The main point is that a quality of the image is not good enough for the publication. I reproduced this image from another paper (with permission) but the only thing I could do, was a print screen of the original and paste into graphical software. I improved the quality by smoothing, but it is still not good enough for the publisher.
The reviewer comment:
>
> The quality of the figures 1 and 2 is still not good. I recommend authors convert the schematics into vector graphics.
>
>
>
I can't find what and how to do it. Did you have a similar problem and solved it?
EDIT to explain what is on the figure:
The figure shows elements of a vehicle with dimensions (numbers), different coordinate systems, force... it is rather complicated and maybe I could redraw the arrows (alhough many of them) but the background is a photo of the element.<issue_comment>username_1: It is difficult to provide a detailed reply without knowing more about the figure, for example if it is a photograph or a line graph. I will therefore concentrate on the general aspects.
First, the best would be if you could get some form of original from the author (or whoever) has the copyright). Screen dumps are clearly not sufficient since printing requires high resolution (300 dpi in final reproduction size is a commonly quoted resolution in journals)
Second, if it is a line graph, and it sounds as if that is the case, I would argue that the best way is to put the image in the background of a vector-based drawing program such as Inkscape/Illustrator/Corel Draw and manually redraw the figure. This is done by placing the illustration in a background layer and then draw lines in the program to reproduce the background. This requires learning a vector-based software and is a tough solution for the short-term but one I strongly recommend for the long-term. If the plot is based on data, for example a scatter graph, then you could digitize the data and re-plot it as long as you think of the re-plot as a version of the original plot and not use data points for additional analysis.
There are of course numerous kinds of complicated plots where the second approach will not work so trying to get the source would be the first choice. Screen dump quality bitmaps will be rejected by most if not all journals.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Without going into the *how* of your question (which @username_1 answered succinctly), I would say that going forward you should always try to have the best quality graphs when you provide a submission. That means they should either be vector graphics (i.e., graphics that do not rely on bitmapped representation but rather are scalable), or high DPI (dots per inch); I try for 600dpi in all images that aren't vector.
Tips: if your graphic has a .jpg, .gif, .png, or .tiff extension, it is not a vector graphic. If it has a .eps or .pdf extension, it *may* be a vector graphic, but you need to zoom in to ensure that the lines are not turning fuzzy. If it is a .svg, it is (I think) a vector graphic, but I always do the zoom test to make sure.
Finally, always do a zoom test on all your graphics in your PDF submissions. I've had vector graphics turn into bitmapped graphics during the conversion-to-PDF stage. If that happens, you need to figure out where the problem is taking place and fix it (e.g., it could be that your conversion from .eps to .pdf for an individual figure changes the image, and another conversion tool might be able to handle it properly).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Many PDF viewers (including Adobe Acrobat, Skim, and Preview on the Mac) can be used to copy regions out of a PDF file as independent PDF files. (A typical workflow is to select a rectangle with the marquee tool, Copy, and then New from Clipboard.) In particular, you can extract pixelmap graphics from PDF files at exactly the same resolution as they appear in the source PDF, and you can extract vector graphics. If there are undesired elements of the paper that overlap the figure, you can usually remove them in Adobe Illustrator, which reads and writes PDF files natively, so editing will preserve vector graphics and pixelmap resolution.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/27 | 1,134 | 4,510 | <issue_start>username_0: I feel awkward addressing myself as Dr. X or Prof X. I know that this is common practice (e.g. in emails, letters, etc..). In emails, I prefer to just use my initials or first name. Is this a common experience (i.e. not wanting to be addressed as Dr. or Professor)?<issue_comment>username_1: Use whatever you feel comfortable with. That said, you should also tailor it to the type of correspondence when necessary. A formal letter should include a formal address for yourself, and less formal can be more or less whatever you'd like. In dealing with students, I generally sign school related emails as "Dr. G.," (with just the first letter of my last name) but I've also taught classes where I've gone by my first name exclusively, and let the students decide how to address me, after telling them it is fine with me if they use my first name. More formal student correspondence (e.g., if I'm cc'ing another instructor, or if the matter involves the administration) gets my full last name, and correspondence to colleagues is almost always my first name.
I also have a signature block, that includes my title, full name, email address and (sometimes) my telephone number.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I've been using my initials as the "sign-off" for my emails as long as I've had my email account. The difference between a formal email and an informal one is whether or not I include the "name block" or if I leave it out, which greeting I use ("Dear Prof. X" or "Dear Y"), and which valediction I use ("Sincerely" versus "Thanks" or "Cheers" or the like).
Normally, I don't know many people who sign their full names to an email. For an *official letter,* however, your address should be your full name, unless you know the recipient well enough to be on a first name basis with them. (And even then you might still opt for the full name!)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There seems to be two questions/issues here.
A lot of people I know do not use Dr/Prof/PhD when referring to themselves and in email signatures. I would say that this is quite common and perfectly acceptable.
The final statement you make is "not wanting to be addressed as Dr. or Professor." I think this is quite a bit rarer. I know a lot of people who tell students that they can call them by first name or Dr, or whatever they are comfortable with. I also know people who say "please call me by by first name". I don't know anyone who ever says "please don't call me Dr. or Professor." I would go so far as to say that demanding someone not use an honorific, or being offended when they do, is uncommon and not proper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I think that it depends on type of email or letter you are writing.
When you are writing an official email, it is better to use your initial as `Dr.`, but when you are writing to a friend I prefer not to use `Dr.` or `Prof.`. However, It all depends on the person. Some people prefer to be called `Professor Doctor Name Surname` even by their close friends and some other are nicer and using their given name is sufficient for them.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: This answer is US-centric and based on my own experiences, so take it with a grain of salt.
"Professor" is a job title; "Doctor" is an academic title. Unless you're dealing with your students (in or outside of class), it's usually not necessary to refer yourself or to be referred to as "Prof. Lastname." It's common, at least in the United States, for anyone from grad students on up (and occasionally undergrads) to refer to each other by their first names, even over email.
A signature block is a good way to get around the issue; something like:
```
Dr. Firstname Lastname
Florple Professor of Theoretical Blorplonomics
Foobarbaz University, Room 12-345, (555)-123-4567
```
conveys your rank and title without having to worry about whether you should address yourself as Dr. Prof. X, Prof. X, Dr. X, etc. (In most situations, at least in science in the United States, being a professor implies that you have a doctorate, so the "Dr." above isn't necessary. The same line of thought about the email signature applies to doctors outside of academia, though.)
Personally, I generally just use my name, without any titles, except when (a) I'm in a formal or professional setting; (b) most of the people I'm around don't have similar titles; and (c) it matters professionally that I have such titles. Those situations don't occur very often.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/02/26 | 692 | 3,094 | <issue_start>username_0: I am asking with respect to decoding a job ad for an assistant professor position at a US University. The ad essentially asks how my talents and goals relate to a 'liberal arts environment'. Previously I associated 'liberal arts' with the major that goes by that name, or thought that it simply meant well-rounded, which is something a student could get at any school. So I guess another version of my question is, what isn't a liberal arts environment at a US university?<issue_comment>username_1: While I don't mean to make these binaries -- because they really aren't and there is a lot of fluidity in humanistic endeavors involving technology and likewise technology that is deeply invested in humanistic thinking, etc -- what "*isn't* a "liberal arts environment" is a STEM environment (science, technology, engineering, math).
Working in a liberal arts environment in general means there is room for and the expectations of independent and outside-of-the-box thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving, rather than what some might call more rigid practices and procedures. Often, a premium is placed on one's ability to communicate opinions and interpretations effectively, and to listen to and consider alternatives -- sometimes to the point where the conversations and the path toward problem-solving ends up more important and useful to the organization (and yourself) more than the actual answer itself. Projects and research tends toward better and fully understanding human nature and society, rather than tangible products, per se.
Or, it could simply mean you'll be working with a bunch of English and History professors instead of Biology professors.
**Note**: This answer was written when this question was at [The Workplace SE](http://workplace.stackexchange.com), and it did not have specifics about the position itself as it does now. This answer is more appropriate for someone taking a general staff position within a college or university and not for a faculty position that is already in a specific field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A liberal arts environment generally focuses on teaching, research, and service. Teaching seems to be the biggest component of a liberal arts environment. Service is also important. A good research program is important also, it is just that more time is spent teaching and honing teaching skills. Usually, teaching evaluations have more weight than publishing in high impact journals.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is an important distinction to make between a "liberal arts *college*" and a liberal arts environment in general.
The former indicates a particular kind of school, normally without graduate schools and professional degree programs, which specializes largely in undergraduate education. While faculty and students do participate in research activities, they are not nearly as extensive or as important as at research universities.
The liberal arts environment, on the other hand, is the tradition in which essentially all modern Western university operates.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/27 | 2,686 | 12,314 | <issue_start>username_0: First some background. Two years ago I joined a research group as a research associate. My intention in obtaining that position was to publish with the group and build some academic capital, but in the two years I have been there, I have been steered toward support work and software development, and away from research. I have not been included in any of the group's publications and have had to publish unrelated work on my own.
I subsequently found out that to justify the Ph.D. requirement for the position I hold, my employers added a few sentences to the job description to suggest that research would be the central focus of the work. Within my group I am seen as a system administrator and IT specialist. This is apparently what my employers really wanted.
I’m also acutely aware that I lack the superior eloquence of my more persuasive colleagues. (This inability would hamper me not only in academia but in virtually any career.) My superiors cannot be persuaded that the system I have been assigned to create, intended to demonstrate (nonexistent) technical capabilities to a skeptical funding agency, has already been executed by several competent, experienced and well-funded teams of more than one person. The project is an all-consuming, deeply anxiety inducing death march for which I am underqualified. Against this, I have at least three competing projects which cannot receive the exclusive, full-time attention each deserves, and I am continually interrupted with trivial software installation requests and technical failures rare enough not to have been documented in the ever-expanding global online archive of technical minutia, to which StackExchange is a prominent contributor. The perspective is that information technology hasn’t specialized in the past 30 years–nothing is too trivial to undertake (except for them) or too specialized and technical to require immersion and consistent practice. It is the menial and urgent work of cleaning digital bedpans.
I don’t have a family or children–I did not want them. I wanted to work in an environment where I could be paid for research. The compensation is $24K less than the administrative position I previously held. I feel that it is self-defeating for me to continue supporting professors, postdocs, and postgraduate and undergraduate students. There is little incentive to promote an individual assigned to projects that provide funding for the group, and to activities that support the research efforts of others, but which are unlikely themselves to result in publication.
But since my work as a mental technician is valued, I'm wondering whether I might as well seek better compensated employment outside of academia, where I would not have the indignity of supporting persons whose career opportunities are foreclosed to me.<issue_comment>username_1: This sounds terrible and also highly questionable on the part of the research group. To provide help is difficult since the question really is one for you to solve in the sense that you need to think about your options. As I understand you stand very good chances of getting employed if you decide to leave your current position so employment does not seem to be the issue. This is a positive aspect of the situation because you have a "way out".
The decision is whether you value to continue with research (in its true sense). Added to your will is also the market of research positions. A careful check of what is out there and also possibly some contacts with groups/persons that are working on topics that within your sphere of interest. this allows you to sound out your possibilities so that you could set a time frame on your decision, when to pull the plug.
So i think the decision is exclusively yours and it hinges on probing your interests and the possibilities around you. I hope this is of some assistance.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your writing certainly does not betray a "lack of eloquence"; in fact, it's probably better than most of the computer scientists I know!
That said, as JeffE has indicated, you are being mishandled by your employers, and I would strongly encourage you to find a new position as soon as possible. However, it is important to point out that your situation is *not* academic versus industrial, but instead good employer versus bad employer. The distinction is crucial.
In any position, there will be parts of your job that are less appealing than others; the absolute "dream job" which you're happy about 100% only exists in Utopia. The key is to make sure that the important parts of your job give you more satisfaction than the less desirable aspects take away. Here, this clearly isn't the case. That does **not** mean that you can't find what you're looking for, either in industry *or* in academia. What it does mean is that you need to find it somewhere else than where you are, because it's clear the job isn't going to change in any sort of meaningful way in the short term.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Perhaps the situation in Ireland is different from other parts of the Commonwealth. But I would have thought that the role of "research associate" would be that of a support person and not on the track to acquiring a PhD nor a means of building up "academic capital".
In my experience, you'd first need to acquire a PhD as the first step to building up your "academic capital" - another term for publish or perish (aka get funding or perish)
In the absence of more information it would appear that there is a difference between what you thought you were being hired for and what your employer hired you to do. Another point ... you say "employer"; is that an academic institution? or some enterprise undertaking research?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You are being taken advantage of.
You should check the rules at your institution relating to authorship. It sounds like you have made a significant intellectual contribution to the papers that were published, so you deserve to be listed on them as an author. There are means by which you can have yourself rightfully listed as an author on the papers.
The practice of more established academics taking advantage of postdocs and research assistants is widspread in university departments worldwide. Your situation is all too common.
It does however sound like that you "walked into" the situation a little bit, and that you should have been more assertive and forthright from the start about your role in the team, your contribution to the papers that were published, and your rights as an author.
You should move on and view the situation as a learning experience for next time, and improve your self confidence and assertivenes.
Btw not sure what not having a wife and kids has to do with anything apart from you are able to take more risks with your career?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The answers so far have many good points: you are being abused, you have been misled, you would do well to seek employment elsewhere, perhaps you were not assertive enough, and so on. But I believe *none of that matters much compared to your decisions from this point on*. You sound like a person who prefers to think ahead and plan important decisions rather than improvising—many researchers are thinkers who want to weigh their options and take their time to come to decisions. If you wish, you may plan for retribution and for taking a fight, but in the end this will not make your current workplace any more healthy for you to work in. I would suggest the following concrete steps of action:
Find the job advertisement you responded to, the written job description, your letter of application with any supplements (even if it was just an email), your employment contract, and any other documents (including emails) that pertain to the decision to accept your current employment. File these together in a place where they are safe and where you can find them if needed. Make copies. *Assert to yourself that you were promised something that was not delivered.*
Gather the articles you have written or started to write, regardless of whether they are published or not. Also, make a list of other work you have performed during your employment. For example, list the features you have implemented in the software system you described. File them together in a place where you can easily find them. *Assert to yourself that you have performed well in your work despite the situation.*
Look for a new job that is certain to either include research opportunities or to be totally unrelated to research but limited enough to allow you the mental capacity you need to conduct research on your own. Perhaps this position can be found within your current university, but in another group. Choose carefully and ask direct questions about what is most important for you: "how many days a week will I be able to work on research?", "how many days a week will I have to do overtime?", etc. Ask to meet one or two of your potential co-workers and ask them if they believe you would get what you are looking for. Be friendly and remember it is not their fault your current supervisor is misbehaving. *Assert to yourself that you can consider the options in your own time and that the responses to your direct questions are what matters in your choice, not feelings that you are fabricating out of previous bad experiences.*
Agree on the date when you will start in the new job, taking into account the conditions of your current employment. When you have signed the contract for the new position, immediately notify your current supervisor that you will move to another job and ask for a prioritised list of tasks that you should complete before leaving. Complete these tasks to the best of your ability and ask for a letter of reference. *Assert to yourself that you have fulfilled the conditions of your employment and are entitled to a reference.*
If your supervisor asks for a reason for you leaving, or becomes unreasonable, explain shortly that based on the job description, you thought you had a research position but it has turned out to be a technical position. Your supervisor is likely to try to bargain with you, and try to promise you more research opportunities in the future. Don't trust this promise—it comes from the person who misled you and who cannot be trusted. Stay firm but polite and state that you feel it is time for you to move on. Keep repeating this if the supervisor insists: you wanted to do research but the position is technical, and it is now time for you to move on. *Assert to yourself that you have no obligation to explain your personal choices.*
If your supervisor does not write the letter of recommendation, politely but shortly remind him a few (three) times (do it over email and save the emails), but then let it be. He will owe you one, and if you ever meet in the future, he will be the one who didn't behave properly. *Assert to yourself that you have resolved the situation by your own actions and that any remaining problems are not yours.*
If you got a new research position, engage frequently with your new supervisor and agree on writing a joint article. Make it something simple that you can complete soon. Focus on getting that article out, even at the expense of other assignments. Then keep repeating the exercise, taking on larger and larger projects, involving other members of your group. *Share your successes and failures in your new job with your supervisor and your peers, and listen to their encouragement and advice.*
If you didn't get a new research position, relax in your new job. Don't take on new things and just let your supervisor assign tasks to you. However, always carry out those tasks well. In your spare time, you can now complete the work you had started before, and build a small portfolio to support you in applying for a research position. *Assert to yourself that you are not going into the game that your supervisor went into—you proceed in your own pace.*
The most important thing after getting out of your current situation is not to bring with you any maladaptive behaviour that you may have developed as a result of the stressful and unreasonable environment you have worked in.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2013/02/27 | 898 | 3,974 | <issue_start>username_0: I help with typesetting of one scientific journal: I recieve the articles in the form in which they were finally accepted, and I re-format them etc. to make them ready for publication. Currently, my title in the journal colophon says: "**Graphic Design and Typesetting: <NAME>**".
However, I get the impression that this position is in the scientific jargon usually called "**Copy Editor**", which would suit the colophon quite well since there are other "Editors" listed there (Language, Guest, Editor-in-charge, etc.). I want to make sure whether this is appropriate or not.
So: *Who am I?*<issue_comment>username_1: A copy editor is usually the person who runs through the manuscript checking that it adheres to the style of the journal. this includes checking references, checking figure numbering but also spelling and language, in short almost everything. The copy editor improves the paper from these formal/technical points of view. It is not usually the copy editor that typesets the paper because that is usually done by a typesetter involved with the printer. Having said that, with purely electronic publication it is more likely that this task would also end up with a copy editor. Thus the old demarcation lines between copy editor and printer may be less and less clear.
The editors usually handle scientific content and managing contacts between reviewers and authors on matters of the scientific content as well as making decisions. The name for this varies a lot between journals.
So who are you? Your current "title" may be OK but if you also improve the formal and technical quality of the paper, copy editor would be most appropriate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: According to [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_editing),
>
> Typically, copy editing involves correcting spelling, punctuation, grammar, terminology, jargon, and semantics, and ensuring that the text adheres to the publisher's style or an external style guide [...].
>
>
>
You say that you "re-format" articles. I assume you mean things like changing font and paragraph attributes. If you do not change the text (e.g., correct the errors), then perhaps the title "copy editor" is not the best fit for you.
However, Wikipedia states that
>
> The role of the copy editor varies considerably from one publication to another. Some newspaper copy editors select stories from wire service copy; others use desktop publishing software to do design and layout work that once was the province of design and production specialists.
>
>
>
The last statement supports username_1's comment that "the old demarcation lines between copy editor and printer may be less and less clear."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In order to answer your question, let me explain my view of copy editing and typesetting
In my field, after an article is accepted it is copy edited and then typeset. The role of the copy editor is to check for consistencies with the journal style, find grammatical and typographical errors, and provide guidance to the typesetter. The copy editor often produces a short list of "author queries" where the copy editor has found "inconsistencies" (often unused references or undefined abbreviations). Generally I receive a copy of the double-spaced manuscript with the copy editors markup and the typeset article. We are then expected to make sure the typeset manuscript is "correct".
I don't think there is a difference in prestige between copy editor and typesetter, they are really different roles (or different perspectives of the similar roles). You say in your comments that you do not like the title, I would talk to the publisher/editor-in-chief about changing it. You can either approach this from a graphic design vantage (the list will look better) or from a professional prospective (I edit I don't do graphic design). The key is you need to know what you want to be called.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/02/28 | 1,517 | 6,780 | <issue_start>username_0: I think the title says it all, but here it goes. I am a final year PhD student in pure mathematics. My PhD has been running smoothly and I will graudate on time next summer.
This year I started applying for postdoctoral/assistant professor positions in Europe and in United States. The reviewing processes for these positions have already started, for example the earliest one started in mid December.
As times passes I start to worry that the reviewing process will take longer than I expected. I understand that the people in the search committees have other things to do an that they may have large numbers of applicants to review. But as someone who will be unemployed next September, I am worried that there might not be enough time for me to look for alternatives if these applications turn out to be unsuccessful.
Hence, I would like to ask what the normal period of time is for a recruiting process to finish. A side question might be if I would be notified if my application was unsuccessful. In a few job announcements it is stated that only the successfull candidates will be contacted. Hence if it is not stated otherwise in the job announcement, can I assume that I will be contacted no matter the outcome?<issue_comment>username_1: First off, timings are very different in different countries. I have experience applying in Germany, UK, US and Sweden, with radically different time scales. The US runs on a very steady clock, where there tends to be a season for applications, for interviews, for notifications, and relatively few events happen outside this rhythm, while elsewhere is much more anarchic with respect to timing.
Shortest time periods I have had in the UK where a polite refusal has shown up as quickly as within about 2 weeks after the deadline.
In the US, you would usually apply during September-January, interview January-March, and be offered a job February-May or so. Slightly different timings are in effect for postdoctoral positions versus professorships, and there tends to be a second round of applications when schools scramble to cover teaching needs for the fall.
My experience with the US also indicates that you should **not** expect full information from everyone. Finding out you were not considered by simply not hearing anything from the school for several years is not an unusual situation.
UK schools have been diligent about letting me know one way or another.
German schools have sometimes delayed up towards 2-3 years before letting me know.
And the Swedish system is a beast almost entirely unto its own. For one thing, the process is utterly transparent: the list of applicants, as well as external reviews of the candidates and the minutes of all the committee meetings are all a matter of public record, and is usually distributed to all candidates directly as a matter of courtesy. The process is one of the lengthiest I have ever seen — it is in no way seen as unreasonable that well over 1 year passes from application deadline to notification.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From what I've seen, the time highly depends on the formality of the recruiting process. For some postdoctoral position where the recruitment only depended on the PI of the project funding the position, the process was very short, i.e., a couple of weeks between the deadline and the interview. On the other hand, I've witnessed, for a lecturer position, a deadline in June and candidates for the interview contacted in late September (but I guess the summer break does not speed up the process).
Usually, when they mention that only successful candidates will be contacted, they also mention a notification date: "If you haven't heard from us by the X, then consider yourself as unsuccessful". I've also seen cases where the announcement didn't say that only successful candidates would be contacted, and yet they didn't contact unsuccessful candidates.
In any case, if there is a position you're particularly interested in, do not hesitate to contact the recruiters, if only to know when you might get an answer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You mention that you are worried that you will not have enough time to apply for alternative jobs if you are unsuccessful in your primary choices.
When I am in job seeking mode, I apply to every job that I would find acceptable, irrespective of what other jobs I have applied for.
I assume the worst for any given application - even those for which I can tick every box and satisfy every criterion. I do not live in hope. I apply, consider my application a ticket in a lottery, and look for the next job to apply for.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In general I think it is best to assume that unless you are successful you will not hear about any decision. In other words rejection letters are fairly uncommon. This is not a good thing, but it is a fact of academic life. From a university prospective the hiring process is not finished until they have a signed contract. This might not happen until months after a formal offer is made and verbally agreed to. In the cases where HR sends out notifications, it is often not until the search is over.
A reasonable coping strategy is immediately after submitting the application to assume that you have been rejected and not think about the application again. If you miraculously get an interview you will then be happy. Immediately after completing the interview, you should again assume you have been rejected.
As for the uncertainty influencing the job search, you need to be applying for everything and anything. If you are lucky enough to get a position, you then need to decide if you want to accept it. Unfortunately the job market is so competitive that a position in hand is almost always better than a position applied for or a position yet to be announced.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I think the timetable in Europe is a little more chaotic, but if you haven't been told you're under consideration at a job in the US in mathematics by the end of February, it is extremely unlikely that you are going to get it.
This not to say that lots of offers don't go out in March and April, but those are usually to people who already know they are on a short list or have been interviewed by this point. You might want to inquire with committees about whether you are still under consideration (it's fine to do this *once* by this stage, I think).
Of course, there are exceptions (there are even a few jobs being posted now), but I would definitely start looking into alternatives. My personal perception is that this was a very tough year for postdocs in mathematics in the US, so lots of good candidates have had trouble finding jobs.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/02/28 | 519 | 2,060 | <issue_start>username_0: I currently have a degree as a Master in Computer Sciences, and i was always wondering on how to call myself in a more "short" manner. For example, a PhD might introduce himself as a "Doctor" to other people, but how does a MSc call himself: "Master"? "Mister"? "MSc"?.
Talking to some PhD and MSC acquaintances, they had the same doubt about it, and i think this might be a good place to inquire about such topic, and i could not find another related question to answer myself.<issue_comment>username_1: According to proper etiquette you may use *Master* as a title (as in “Master Segovia”) if and only if you are:
* the heir apparent of a Scottish viscount or baron
* a boy not old enough to be called “Mr.”
The *New Oxford American Dictionary* (which gives the above information) also lists the archaic use as a “title for a man of high rank or learning”, but (a) that is archaic, (b) it was not linked to a specific degree, just a courtesy title.
**There is no formal title** in British English or American English to designate someone who holds a Master's degree. *Get over it, and earn a PhD! :)*
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You would not address yourself as 'Master so-and-so' but there are circumstances where is it not inappropriate to include your graduate degree with your name; 'So and So, MSc'. The obvious examples of this type of use are publications and presentations.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: While my Internet search has come up sparse, I think most etiquette guides suggest that you do not refer to yourself with honorifics. There are some exceptions where the honorific carries immediate pertinent information. For example, it might be acceptable for a medical doctor walking in a exam room to introduce herself as "Dr. <NAME>", to indicate their role in the relationship, although I prefer "Your doctor <NAME>" since it clearly separates honorific from role.
As for how to refer to an individual with a masters degree, there is no associated honorific.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/03/01 | 1,495 | 5,338 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a Belgian colleague who is **“Prof. Dr. ir.”**. What does it mean?<issue_comment>username_1: In some countries you use all of the titles one holds (e.g. Germany, Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium etc.)
In plain English it means someone who holds the profession of engineering (can be just bachelors or masters) who has a PhD and who is a Professor (senior ranked, depending on the system can mean a full professor or even an associate prof).
Edit:
The tricky bit is what constitutes holding the professing of engineering. In Netherlands/Belgium it is automatic once you have the degree from a technical uni (e.g. Delft or Eindhoven). In some places you need to be a certified engineer to hold it (e.g. Malaysia or Mexico as I understand).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Ir. means a masters degree in Engineering.
source : Belgian Education :)
I added a "reference". This Prof. Dr. Ir. received a M.Sc. degree in electrical engineering and the Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (K.U.Leuven), Belgium
Also, from wikipedia:
Belgium
In Belgium, there are two types of engineering degrees:
* "Burgerlijk Ingenieur" /"Ingénieur civil" or "Master of Science in Engineering" (abbrev. "ir.") - 5 years study (3 BSc. + 2 MSc.)
* "Bio-ingenieur"/ "Bioingénieur" or "Master of Science in Bioscience Engineering" (abbrev. "ir") - 5 years study (3 BSc. + 2 MSc.)
* "Industrieel Ingenieur" or "Master of Science in Industrial Sciences" (abbrev. "Ing.") - 4 years study (3 BSc. + 1 MSc.)(3 BSc. + 2 MSc. in 2013-future) (for the Flemish Region)
* "Ingénieur industriel" or "Master of Science in Industrial Sciences" (abbrev. "Ing.") - 5 years study (3 BSc. + 2 MSc.) (for the Walloon Region)
[link](http://people.mech.kuleuven.be/~jswevers/)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: *This is true for Germany, but I am not sure about other countries.*
The doctoral title you hold, unlike other titles, can be a voluntary addition to the name. It is therefore the only title you can add to your passport.
Based on the situation, you can leave it out though. Most colleagues left it out on their doorbell, some add their field (like the engineering in this case); partially to avoid people with the flu ringing at their door.
Adding your field to your title can help in other situations as well, since it simply conveys what you are doing in three letters or less. People from your, or related, fields can then simply judge what subtopics best to look into, while talking to you at e.g. a conference.
The addition of the Prof. tells people that you are (also) holding a teaching position, or at least where at some point. This shows people even more of what you do. Being yet another bar to pass, some people don't like it being left out, when addressed.
So: trying to tell people more about him, your colleague added eight letters and three dots to his name. Pretty neat, for a CV, right?
**EDIT:** Changed, based on information given by [pieter](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/22/pieter).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Ir. is a title equivalent to a Master's (it takes five years to get as far as I know since all technical/natural sciences Masters are two years, on top of the three year Bachelor) but from a technical university, so therefore in a technical field. I have an MSc. (2 years) and a BSc. (3 years) and thus can use 'Drs' (Doctorandus) which is a title used in the Netherlands. Had I done this/a similar degree in another university, I would have gotten 'Ir.'.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctorandus>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineer%27s_degree> for explaination on the 'Ir.' title. I don't know how much is true of the statement that it often takes seven years, even though it's a five year program.
I know people who have 'Ir.' but are not an engineer (at least not in the classical sense) but have studied something like biotechnology or molecular biology.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm"<NAME>".I'm a Thai Engineer which I've been Certified/Register by Malasia Engineering Council.
I was graduated in Welding Engineer and Master of Science(MSc.Env)also including "International Welding Engineer(IWE)"Diploma register from IIW (International Institute of Welding).
Ir is used for Certified/Register Engineer in Malasia that shown you're a professional registered engineer.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Prof-DR-Ir refers to three professional titles: (1) Prof - Professor (2) DR - Doctorate Holder (3) Ir - Professional Engineer.
**Prof** is normally awarded to one who lectures in a university. He might or might not have a PhD or equivalent. But current university's requirement requires all Professors to have a PhD.
**Doctorate** is a doctoral level qualification ie above master. This could be PhD or EngD or now a new one IndDoc
**Ingeniur** refers to engineers with a minimum BSc in engineering. This is a Board of Professional qualification after a graduate sat for the professional exams after a minimum of 3 yrs experience in field and management.
So if a person holds the title **DR Ir** he is a doctoral holder in engineering. And if he holds **Prof DR Ir** he is a professor in a university who is holding a doctorate in engineering.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/01 | 1,493 | 6,286 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a third year PhD student. I'm not getting much guidance from my adviser. We only meet once a month, and he keeps giving the same general advice. As a consequence of that, we have had to cancel one project since I have no motivation at all for that project.
Now having the new project, things are getting the same. I'm worried about my progress as some of my lab mates are about to graduate. What should I do? I realized my responsibility in driving the project by myself, but most of the time my idea are discarded. Recently when I showed my result, he claims that's garbage without any reasons. What should I do? I'm really thinking of dropping out if situation is not getting better.<issue_comment>username_1: "we have had to cancel one project since I have no motivation at all for that project". What exactly is the relation between having a meeting once a month and not being motivated? This to me sounds more like an excuse rather than a good enough reason.
In the third year of your Phd having one meeting a month is not too bad. Your supervisor is assuming that you know your way and at this stage you should be left to figure it out yourself rather than him spoon feeding you. Of course he will still have strong opinions and might say what you have done is not the right way. It might be that he is busy/not happy with you/thinks he has mentioned to you before how you should do it and you are not listening or that you have a problem in your relation that you don't even know of. If for instance you are just not motivated the way you described its not unnatural for your supervisor to not be so happy with you.
Next time you meet him once he rejects your idea ask him for suggestions and guidance on what to do. Ask politely and genuinely, and if he is not forth coming explain that you need help to figure it out. If he says your results are garbage ask him given his freaking awesome powers and knowledge how he would have done the work differently. He is only human and sometimes complementing somebody can go a long way. At all costs try to be more motivated and don't exhibit the behavior you described in the first part of your message. That's not going to do you any good and might be the root cause of all of this pain.
I don't see why you should drop out after investing so much time and effort. It is in the interest of both of you to sort out the situation and no PhD advisor would like to see someone dropping out after three years (at least for their selfish interests).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> I'm worried about my progress as some of my lab mates are about to graduate.
>
>
> I'm really thinking of dropping out if situation is not getting better.
>
>
>
Before you pull the nuclear trigger and drop out, I strongly suggest that you take some time to figure out when you want to graduate and *what you have to do to accomplish that goal*. Be very specific (e.g., "I will prepare the following work for conference X, which has a submission deadline of Y;" "I will be ready to propose to my committee on Z"). Once you put this on paper, you can go to your advisor and ask him to review it with you, and to make suggestions or provide other guidance. If you can't get your advisor to agree to the plan, at the very least go to another professor (possibly the ombudsman, if there is one) and talk over the plan with him/her. You need something concrete or you could linger forever.
I was lucky in that my advisor forced me to come up with a plan early on (within the first year of working with her), and we came to an agreement on what that plan was going to be. The proposal stage of your eventual PhD work is a similar agreement with your committee. I had a tacit agreement from my advisor that if I met all the goals, I'd be ready to graduate, and I worked hard to make all the deadlines I had set. That in itself was a big motivation, and it worked out.
As far as your projects go, you *must* be personally invested in getting them done. That's one of the driving factors in *every* Ph.D, and you (hopefully) have an intellectual desire to work on the project, so I suggest trying to get into the mindset that you really want to find the answer to the questions posed in the project. That's the fun part of being a scientist, after all! :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are want to have this degree You have to motivate you by yourself, too. Just wait hints from supervisor is not enough. You have to work in your research idea and you can request a bit your supervisor by diplomatic way. You write to him email every week and can give to him update reports, what you doing and how is your progress. Of course, you will nee hints. But I must have some own idea about your future thesis and you better have to work on this idea. You can try write paper to conferences. Conference reviewer evaluation is always good impact to researcher. If just you want you can find way and your method how you can handle situation. Just give to your self some time. And please think, what is important for you! If PhD is important you have to move... You must work by yourself, first...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Welcome to the PhD world...
Where the advisers have little time for you and your ideas are always bad...
... Until you realize that the PhD is a learning process as well! Learning how to do research, how to be independent, how to have integrity and how to push the boundaries of science by a tiny delta...
In the course of those 3 years I am sure you have learned a lot and have become critic about what you do and what others do as well. That is the first step to understand your work was not all in vain!
Find a hint from your adviser, something he inspires you to do and something you think he is right about! (there has to be something, after-all he is still your adviser after 3 years...).
Use that hint as inspiration (although you don't love the muse) and work on something you believe is good. Your adviser is not the only reviewer of your work, scientific community (those papers we submit) are also an evaluation of our work.
Get inspired from the adviser, evaluate your work through scientific community and have confidence.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/02 | 941 | 3,973 | <issue_start>username_0: This is probably only relevant to the UK, because in the USA, PhD funding usually come from the department/university through fellowships/TA/RA.
I applied for PhD at a UK university and got admission. The university also runs an extremely competitive named scholarship competition (for example, [this one](http://www.ox.ac.uk/feesandfunding/prospectivegrad/scholarships/university/felix/) - not the one I got, just an example) that offer holders can compete in. I was fortunate enough to have won the scholarship. However, I am going to turn it down for a funded PhD at another school.
Is it alright to state that I won this scholarship on my academic CV but turned it down? If this was a typical USA PhD funding offer (fellowship/TA/RA), I would not consider stating it on my CV.
**Edit:** This is a similar but slight different question from the "duplicate" because I am not asking about the "typical" PhD fellowship/TA/RA that is awarded to candidates admitted to PhDs in the USA. I am talking about competitive/prestigious scholarships like Rhodes and Gates-Cambridge scholarships that one has to apply for outside of the regular admissions process.<issue_comment>username_1: It might be worth mentioning this while you are applying for PhD positions. But after you have obtained a PhD position, it will be fairly meaningless, as what will matter is how you perform in your PhD studies (ie, number/quality of publications).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that the information that you have won several competitive PhD scholarships is by itself meaningless: you have won one, this is enough information to ensure that you have a potential.
The real interesting information is why you chose one specific scholarship amongst the ones you won. If you state on your CV all the scholarships you won but didn't take, be prepared to answer to the "why this one" question. And be very careful on your answer if you don't know the profile of the asker.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If the award is sufficiently prestigious then you should list it, otherwise you should not.
If you declined a Rhodes scholarship you would be very foolish not to list it on your CV. In the US you should list declined NSF or DoD graduate fellowships. However, you do not want to look like you are padding your resume with extraneous information, so I would advise against listing more than one declined award, and would advise against listing any declined awards that are not well known. In most circumstances the declined scholarship isn't going to give any important information that couldn't be gotten from just listing the scholarship you did accept.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Having easy access to your complete funding application history is critical in the UK. It is not uncommon for funding agencies to ask if you have every applied before. Some of the research councils are now tracking the number of unfunded/triaged applications you have made. As part of my annual review, my university wants to know how many funding applications I make every year (both funded and unfunded). Since I need information about both my successful and unsuccessful applications, I need a place to keep it. For me, the obvious place is the long version of my CV where I keep every piece of information about my academic life. My feeling is if something doesn't make my "long" CV, it gets forgotten.
It is also important to remember that most people don't want to see an unedited version of your long CV. You haven't said which version of your CV (you have more than one right?) you are thinking about including this information on. If you are talking about a 1-page summary CV for promotion to full professor, hopefully you have many more relevant things to include. If you are applying for a research support job where your job might be to help students apply for PhD fellowships, then it is probably of critical importantance.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/03 | 490 | 2,091 | <issue_start>username_0: What is the appropiate position for the 'Acknowledgements' in a paper? Are there policies by (mathematical) journals where to put them?
Furthermore, is it common to make acknowledgements a \paragraph (in Latex), rather than a \subsection or a final \section?<issue_comment>username_1: Acknowledgements generally go a separate section after the conclusion. [You can see the Elsevier advice on acknowledgements sections here](http://www.elsevier.com/journals/research-policy/0048-7333/guide-for-authors#48000). If you have a specific conference or journal you are submitting to, and want to know what other authors have done, browse some of the previous volumes' papers or proceedings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I am sure the position may differ slightly beween journals but commonly it is placed after the conclusions and before the reference list. In some cases the Acknowledgement may be a note at the end of the paper. The journal would hopefully clearly indicate where they want such information in the manuscript. Please refeer to the "Instructions for Authors" (equiv) for any journal you are considering. If you are unsure, ask the editor.
As for the (La)TeX question, the formatting will obviosuly differ depening on the instructions for the specific journal you are targeting. Many journals also have specific (La)TeX classes for manuscripts which may provide further insights into hpow the journal wants the paper structured.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I generally make acknowledgements their own `\section` and place it at the end of the paper's body, before the references or any appendices.
But I really don't think it matters. The referee is not going to care, and it won't affect the acceptance or rejection of the paper. If the journal has a preference, you will hear about it from the copy editor when the time comes to correct the proofs.
You might as well check the Instructions for Authors to see if it addresses this, but otherwise, just pick something reasonable and don't worry about it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/03/03 | 1,434 | 6,433 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an industry based researcher. I research and write policies mostly relating to workplace issues such as codes and manuals. I have just completed my PhD in a related field.
On my CV, I can include about 10 years of industry research (plus my qualification as above). As far as I know, industry research is not considered in the same light as peer-reviewed articles.
**Question:** How do I make industry research a selling point in my CV (in the academic world)?
**Note:** I have no peer-reviewed articles to my credit and there is no possibility of publishing my industry based research outcomes in the wider sense.<issue_comment>username_1: The relevant issue is how to make your research meaningful to your application. Since this would typically not get much attention in a CV, the best place to do this will be either in your cover letter or in the introduction to your research statement.
If your industrial research has informed your choice of problems to study as an academic, or has expanded your skill set, this is information you should relate to the committee. However, if the work is completely unrelated, you may have a hard time convincing a committee that it's worth considering as related experience (beyond the traditional justification of industrial experience in and of itself).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think there might be some confusion. If you write policies, codes, and manuals, that most likely does not qualify as (scientific) research as the term is generally understood by the research community (or the academic community). In our context, (scientific) research generally refers to systematic investigation that leads to new knowledge. The end result of (scientific) research is some new knowledge that was not previously known before.
I know that in other contexts, people sometimes use the word "research" in a different way. For instance, they might talk about "researching an issue", by which they mean, go find newspaper articles, scientific papers, policy briefs, etc. on the topic and read them to get up to speed on the topic as quickly as possible. That's a fine meaning of the term "research", but it's not research as the academic or research community mean it. That kind of activity generally is not a replacement for what academics call (scientific) research.
(Scientific) research is also usually published in a peer-reviewed conference or journal. Academics may give credit only to published work. There are good reasons for this. For one thing, academics value discovering new knowledge and making it available to humankind. If you haven't published, you haven't advanced that agenda. For that reason, if researcher X discovers something new but doesn't publish, and then a year later researcher Y discovers the new thing and publishes, we usually award credit ("priority") to researcher Y, because researcher Y published. Also, peer-reviewed publications are one of the ways that we evaluate the quality of work. Typically, folks on a search committee are not expert in your area and may find it difficult to directly evaluate the quality of your work. If it has been published in a peer-reviewed conference/journal, that speaks to its quality; and the more selective the conference/journal, the more of a testament to quality it is. If your work hasn't been published in a peer-reviewed forum, it's harder to know whether it's any good (and there may even be a suspicion that it wasn't published in a peer-reviewed forum because it wasn't good enough or would not have been able to survive peer review). So, publications matter for hiring. I'm not saying that unpublished work is never taken into account, but it's a much higher hurdle if none of the work has been published, and you need to be honest with yourself about the situation.
I noticed that you asked a similar question about a month and a half ago ([Does my work in industry carry any weight in academia?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/7278/705)). You got similar answers, and some very good advice, at the time. Perhaps it'd be worth starting by reviewing the answers you go to the earlier question, and then editing your question to provide more context and detail, taking into account what you've read there.
Also, you haven't given us much to work with: for instance, you haven't told us what field you are working in; you haven't told us why your work wasn't published and cannot be published in a peer-reviewed forum; you haven't told us what aspects of the industry research you think might be relevant to your application or what options for how to include it in your CV you have considered; you haven't told us what was the work you did in industry, or what the novel scientific contributions were, or what its impact on industry was. The less information we have, the less likely it is that we can provide useful advice.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Emphasize strengths that mirror what would be expected for a 10-year Academic career:
* No peer-reviewed publications? List instead all the internal white papers you've written.
* Mention any academic collaborations when describing roles. (No collaborations? List internal cross-departmental collaborations.)
* List trainees/interns you've mentored.
* List any important talks/presentations you've given related to your research. It won't be the same, as the level of discourse when talking to other researchers is different than when talking to senior managers, but it does demonstrate presentation experience.
* Get very strong letters of recommendation attesting to your strength as a researcher, communicator, and mentor.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Industry research experience, like almost all research experience, only counts if there is a tangible outcome (e.g., grant income, patents, or peer-review publications). In the absence of a tangible outcome, the research experience (industry or otherwise) and contact (industry or otherwise) are nice, but not worth very much. If you want to make you past experience a selling point, you need to create some tangible outcomes. If the experience is valuable in an academic setting, then 10 years of experience should allow you go generate a tangible outcome quickly. Maybe one of your industry contacts will fund a study or provide you with unique data that could be used in a peer-reviewed publication.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/03/04 | 3,059 | 13,458 | <issue_start>username_0: Archiving of papers and projects is very important for most of the people, and everyone has a method of it.
I, personally, try to have different folders for different papers. In the folder of each paper, in addition to my manuscript, I keep my simulation files, experimental data, program codes, etc, in different subfolders. Also, I try to keep track of my revisions on the paper, reviewer comments, my response to reviewers in different subfolders. My method has the advantage of all the related material for a paper are together, and I can quickly track the whole process from initial submission to the final proofreading. However, this usually leads to duplicated files.
I work with both my office desktop and my personal Laptop. I transfer my files between these systems by a flash memory. I agree maybe cloud technology is a better choice in this age, but I postponed it because of my poor internet connection at home.
I am curious to know how others approach to archive their works. I also hope to find some methods more efficient than mine, or get some tips to improve my method.
*Edit at 2 Apr 13:*
Thanks to these great answers, it is almost a month that I use **Git** for my version control. Also, I manage my repositories in the **[Bitbucket](https://bitbucket.org/)**, which gives me unlimited storage for unlimited number of projects.<issue_comment>username_1: I have a similar approach with folders, with two additions:
1. Everything goes into a revision control system. In my case, I've got some things in [Subversion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Subversion) repositories, and others in [Mecurial](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercurial) repositories (I've also dabbled with [Git](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_%28software%29), but haven't made the final transition). The benefits of revision control are that you can always go back to a previous version, you won't have old versions littering your folders, and sharing with collaborators is relatively easy. This should take care of your duplicated-file problem.
2. I also use Dropbox extensively, in order to have my files available on any computer at any time. Dropbox provides a modicum of version control (30 days worth), but it should not replace a proper revision control system. It does provide a cloud-based backup of your work.
Finally, regardless of how you're keeping your work arranged, make sure you keep an off-site backup (e.g., via Dropbox or personally-controlled media).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The question of archiving and synchronizing is a good one and for me relates also to backup and storage as key questions, particularly when working on more than one computer. I will describe what I do without implying it is THE solution, it works for me. I have my work computer as well as a desktop at home. I also have several laptops.
1. On the two desktops at home and work, the data resides on the harddisk, organized in a folder system that has developed over time. I have two 600 Gb 2.5" portable harddisks which I carry between work and office and which I use as shuttle/backups by synchronizing with the desktops at home and work. I use a software called Total Commander (shareware), which works fine for me but I am sure others can be used. This way I have three copies, at work, at home and on the portable disk(s), at all times (except in the worst case antyhing produced between syncs).
2. I do not have any data on my laptops but use the 2.5" as an external hard disk when I am away from home and work. I keep a second 2.5" for backup if I am away for longer periods and try to transport the two disks separately, one in carry on and one in checked in luggage. (I have to add I do not have any secret data so I do not worry about disks being stolen apart from my own losses). I could have all data on the laptop as well but have opted for having a faster but smaller SSD disk in the laptop so my data will not fit.
3. I use drpbox to keep a limited number of files that I use frequently and most often need to share with others. I also use Dropbox to deposit files that I think I might need for specific purposes when out of the office as an extra backup and to be able to access quickly. I do not use Dropbox as a backup but rather backup dropbox occassionally, particularly collaborative files.
This works for me and the solution has developed over time and now the synching is a natural begin-end of the work day and I live with three (four when I synch the second, pure backup, hard disk) exact copies. I could go for an automatic backup as well but have not felt this was worth it at this stage. With this system, I always carry with me all files I have ever produced. I clearly see this will be impossible for some activities but will be quite feasible for most.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I do something vaguely similar, however I also use a makefile to integrate the simulations with the LaTeX source code for the paper (generally there are also a set of MATLAB files that generate the contents of tables and the figures). Then if necessary, the experiments can be repeated and the results stitched in to the paper again, just by typing "make". However, more recently I have been having to make a lot of use of my universities High Performance Computing facility, which makes it much more difficult to do this. It works nicely for more simple projects though.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: 1. I generally write in LaTeX and do statistics in R so those can be easily versioned in a Git repository on BitBucket. On a sidenote, I chose BitBucket over GitHub that because collaborating is easier as it allows you to set up repos that can be forked but you can still prevent the forker from sharing it publicly. GitHub on the other hand (at least when I last looked) required you to tightly integrate into teams. Also, using Git submodules allows me to include common parts (such as my BibTeX files) into multiple projects without duplication of versions (though technically it does reside in multiple places on the drive), however this sometimes causes me some grief because I'm not very skilled with Git.
2. I have tried to acquire additional space in every way I can for Dropbox. It is now large enough that I can generally keep 100% of my active projects (some of them are the Git repos from above) in it. This way everything is always backed up offsite with no intervention. Because I work out of Dropbox as opposed to "My Documents" or the like, I also can seamlessly move from my Windows box at work to my laptop running Ubuntu or OSX. This also means that my stuff is not only backed up in the cloud but also on my other machine's hard drive. One tricky thing for me is the sharing between the two OSes on the laptop. For that I keep the Dropbox in a shared partition, to avoid wasting 2X the disk space.
3. Finally, I do an incremental backup every week or so when I think to plug my external drive in. That external drive is well cared for in a fancy case with fans and it is usually powered off except when I'm backing up. It never leaves my home.
So I have the storage part pretty well worked out. However, I'm constantly trying to tweak the organization part. Right now I keep a projects directory in my Dropbox with multiple subprojects labeled like "2012-XXX\_YYY\_ZZZ" in some attempt to sort them. In these directories are generally subdirectories for study materials (I work with human-subjects), analysis, notes, and any products such as papers that came from the work. In the analysis directory is generally a subdirectory with the actual R code. I try to name that directory something like R\_git, as I generally use the ending to signify that something is backed up elsewhere in another repo. My system gets difficult when I create a product (such as a paper) based on two projects (perhaps two studies). In that case I usually just move the paper subdirectory out to the main projects directory to avoid duplication. I do sometimes find myself searching through directories trying to remember where a given paper was stored, so clearly my system needs more work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Several great answers here already, but here's a few more things to consider:
You could take a look at [rsync](http://rsync.samba.org/) (graphical interfaces are available) and [unison](http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/) for synchronising data/documents between different computers (and/or a USB memory stick). Rsync is simpler but unidirectional, though you can effectively do a full sync by rsyncing in one direction then the other. Unison is much more powerful and results in the two copies ending up identical, letting you specify which files to ignore, how to resolve conflicts, etc. I use unison every day to keep my laptop and desktop in sync.
Also, don't discount your own university's networked storage if available, which will usually take care of backup and give you a level of protection against most problems short of a nuclear bomb. This can be slow when accessed offsite, for example, but for ours I find it doesn't matter too much as long as your files aren't enormous. If nothing else, it can be useful as a "master" copy that you synchronise your other copies against.
Finally, however you choose to organise your files and folders, spend a few minutes writing down *how* you're organising them in a read-me file so that, if the worse should happen, your colleagues can understand how to access your files and your work won't be wasted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Toward the less-addressed organizational aspect of the question, I find that I need to maintain a fairly structured organization in order to effectively manage my papers, presentation, code, etc. over time. My methods result in a minor amount of duplication, but it is rare and there are never more than 3 copies of a document at the very most. This is, of course, my own idiosyncratic system, but perhaps it will be useful as inspiration or a template for how you think about developing your own.
First, my driving principles of organization:
* Since collaborative projects have to be shared in so many different ways, I do not use any specialty organizational software, but just the hierarchy of the file system.
* My primary sorting heuristic mirrors how I organize my time (and how it is attributed to projects in funding bookkeeping)
* Higher level directory names are shorter, since they are more persistent and more frequently typed; lower level names are as long as they need to be to understand what they are far in the future.
* No directory should have more than a dozen or so subdirectories
Following these principles, my first layer of directories are sorted by the main business functions of academia:
* **pursuit**: all proposals and funding pursuit goes here
* **projects**: this directory contains one subdirectory for each funded project that is currently active (plus one for each major line of preliminary work). Rationale: each grant/contract needs to have its activities tracked individually for reporting to the funder.
* **internal**: administrative dealings with my institution, such as travel receipts, training documents, and internal process documents go here. Travel receipts get their own subdirectory.
* **service**: professional service, including teaching, recommendation letters, conference organization, seminar series, journal editing, and reviewing. One subdirectory for each major topic (e.g., one for each conference, another for all recommendation letters).
* **notes**: all personal notes and reading, with a subdirectory for talk notes, another for manuals, and another for downloaded papers (with further subdirectories for major topics)
* **sites**: contains one directory for each website where I am one of the maintainers.
Every one of these also contains either an archive subdirectory, where I move completed tasks, either by topic (e.g., pursuit, projects) or by year (e.g., internal, service).
In any second-level directory, I maintain a README file that tells me what I will need to know when I re-visit something after forgetting all about it. The directories for funded projects also have a stereotyped structure:
* **contract**: This is where all contract documents go for funded projects.
* **admin**: all reporting, deliverables, etc.
* **publications**: each paper gets its own directory; the conference presentation for a paper and any derivative papers also go here.
* **presentations**: all presentations not directly associated with a paper go here
* Beyond that, there are directories for each major strand of work in the project
* For publications, every published paper (and supplement) also gets a copy, with a long informative name including the year, in the publications directory for my professional website.
* For collaborative projects, there may also be a top-level split between internal and shared, with certain documents having a master version in internal and a second copy in shared.
Finally, everything that I care about must be backed up in two different ways:
1. By the backup system of each machine that I use.
2. By means of some sort of synchronization software (with version control when possible). I am currently using a mixture of SVN, git, Mercurial, Dropbox, and BitTorrent Sync, chosen per-project based on the collaborators.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/03/04 | 1,097 | 4,720 | <issue_start>username_0: If you are invited to give a departmental seminar and the department offers to put you up for up to two nights, how long should your visit be? I find it a little rude when our speakers arrive an hour before and leave an hour after the seminar. Do you have to spend a full day at the host department?<issue_comment>username_1: Think of this as an opportunity, rather than an obligation.
Find people in the department who are doing interesting work and try to organise a short meeting with them. Volunteer to hang around after your presentation to talk to PhD students (and ensure that your presentation has some appeal to keep people around). Ideally, try to have a fairly full schedule to maximise the benefits gained from the opportunity, though avoid having every minute planned so that you can have spontaneous extended discussions with people, should the opportunity arise.
Planning ahead is probably key, as not everyone will be able to accept an unannounced visitor for a lengthy discussion.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, it is not rude to make only a brief visit, especially if you accept with, e.g. "I would love to come, thank you, but I'm afraid I can only come there for the afternoon - I hope that is okay?"
Certainly I agree that it is as great idea to stay for the whole day if you can.
I've noticed that perception of etiquette seems to differ a lot from person to person. Whether or not it is okay to recommend a taxi from the airport (as opposed to picking up the visitor yourself), whether or not to take visitors out for a late drink (or karaoke!), whether to put them up in a hotel or your house, how long to encourage them to stay... these are all aspects where I've seen things done differently. But a small minimum of communication beforehand and flexibility during the visit seems to suffice to guarantee a good visit.
If you're the one visiting, I would certainly recommend at the very least hanging around the department some and going out to dinner with your hosts (assuming they invited), but it's more or less up to you.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: People who give invited seminars are quite busy. It is frequently the case that they may have to come late or leave early. However, unless the guest is local, it is usually considered normal for a guest to spend a day visiting the department. The reason for this is that many times there are people who wish to meet with the visiting speaker, and thus an extended schedule is necessary. Cutting the visit short may also deprive *you* of meeting people who might valuable future collaborators for your work efforts.
However, in circumstances where the visit does need to be curtailed due to length, the more important it is to communicate this with the host organization *in advance*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are the one organizing the trip, telling the visitor that you are covering one or two nights' stay is enough of indication that the department wants to host a long enough visit that would allow meeting with other faculty, post-docs, and possibly grad students. If the visitor does not take the hint, you may have to ask them, "So basically you are refusing to meet with our department?" -- and you can actually take it to the chair and ask whether it would make sense to withdraw the invitation, as this visit is the event that is supposed to benefit the department, not just hit the financial bottom line. Basically, whoever is paying for the trip should be fine with an abridged visit. If the department is paying for it (the round-trip ticket will be a fortune for the same day trip), it has all the rights to have the visitor to themselves to ask questions and promote the young researchers of the department. If somebody's grant is paying for the trip, then let have them waste the money. I ran a department colloquia series for a year, and never had an issue like that with any of the visitors, including some biggish wigs. (We are sort of ways away from big airports in a US midwestern college town, so there is little physical opportunity for the visitors to escape; it's not like you are taking a train ride from one university in Boston to another.)
If you are the one visiting... well, if you don't take the hint, you will lose respect of that whole group. If you are a young researcher, that may be a big hit to take: people talk, and in a year or so, the rumor may spread to half of your discipline about your rudeness. If you are a named prof with $XX million of external funding, you don't have to give a s$%t about anybody, and by now everybody else in the discipline knows that much about you already.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/03/04 | 980 | 4,622 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student in mathematics working on functional analysis of quantum information (basically using matrix techniques in some well-known problems). I am presently applying for postdoctoral positions (in both Mathematics and Quantitative Physics departments). However, I am not getting any reply from most of the places and got a few rejection letters as well. Since I am from Mathematics, I cannot apply to experimental groups (where there are more openings). Again, being a Mathematics student and working in Physics (even though there are obvious connections between them) is not seen as a good example among certain parts of the physics community and the majority of the Mathematicians in this part of the world (personal opinion based on certain bitter experiences). I do not know whether it is the same in other places as well.
I feel that I have not projected myself by writing a good research statement. I have written it after reading the first few entries of Google search results as well as advice from the AMS. I have mostly highlighted my present work, with only a short discussion of future ideas.
To make my life more complicated, I want to move out of the present problems which I am working presently and choose some new problems for my postdoctoral research. I have a peripheral knowledge about the works of different groups. However, modifying my research statement according to the research work of each group is, I think, difficult (as I need to spend time to read their works and spot exactly where my knowledge can be used in their problems and so on). The reason for not having time is I am simultaneously working on some research problem as well as writing my thesis, which I need to submit in the coming months.
In this situation, how do I write a good research statement? I want to convey the message to potential employers that, while I have not done research on their problem yet (though I know them to certain level), given an opportunity I can learn and do work in their areas.<issue_comment>username_1: Writing a postdoctoral research statement should not be a huge exercise. Unless you are applying for a major postdoctoral fellowship, I would not necessarily expect a huge research statement. In many cases, in fact, you may not need a research statement at all to apply for a postdoctoral appointment; a cover letter, CV, and list of references may suffice. (When I hired my current postdoctoral associate, those were the materials I asked for.)
Now, that said, your statement should provide a few pieces of information:
* A brief description of your current project, and any major research skills or tools you have acquired as a result of your training.
* A brief summary of the kinds of problems you would like to study as a postdoctoral associate. If these are aligned with the interests of the group you are applying to, this is even more helpful.
Ultimately, however, when you are applying for a postdoctoral position, you are applying to a specific individual, who will be the one reviewing the applications. What I am looking for is someone who has actually responded to **my** job posting, not just *a* job posting. That means I want to see a clear statement that the applicant has thought about what we do in my group, and how her skills will contribute to the project for which I'm advertising. If there's no such indication, I'm much less likely to take the application seriously, *unless* there are mitigating factors (lots of publications in top journals, strong recommendation letters from colleagues I know, and so on).
Finally, I should also point out that the quality of your written English could be improved. While this might seem to be a minor issue, a poorly written statement can be enough for me as an advisor to think twice about hiring someone, simply because I would worry about my ability to communicate with the candidate. (Furthermore, someone whose communication skills are somewhat deficient will have a harder time finding a position than someone proficient.)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: *"I have written [my research statement] **after reading the first few entries of Google search results** as well as advice from the AMS."*
I haven't read your research statement but I would suspect that reading the first few entries off of Google may have been insufficient to fully support your consideration for a post-doc position.
Also, get someone to test read your research statement. Get some feedback on how to improve your documents and revise-revise-revise. Best of luck.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/03/05 | 1,270 | 4,785 | <issue_start>username_0: I was reading the following article by <NAME>. [HOWTO: Get into grad school for science, engineering, math and computer science](http://matt.might.net/articles/how-to-apply-and-get-in-to-graduate-school-in-science-mathematics-engineering-or-computer-science/)
I saw the following the paragraph
>
> What doesn't matter
>
>
> GPA? I don't care if it's 2.0 or 4.0. I won't even look at it. The school you went to? I'll judge you the same whether you went to Nowhere State U or a top-ten school. Transcripts? Never seen one. GREs? Irrelevant. Where you work/worked? Unless it's a research lab, it's not important. I don't think these items have much predictive capacity as to whether or not someone can complete a Ph.D.
>
>
>
Is <NAME> telling the truth?
For me it's very hard believe that GPA, GRE scores and undergraduate school don't matter. I used to think that they play an extremely important role in grad school admission.<issue_comment>username_1: I am not doing my PhD in CS or maths but based on my experience, I believe it's a **yes** and a **no**, more specifically:
>
> I don't think these items have much predictive capacity as to whether or not someone can complete a Ph.D.
>
>
>
... is an accurate assessment of the situation. Being a grad student is sort of waking up in a different world, what you have done previously isn't really indicative of what you are capable of doing during your PhD. Most PIs are aware of that...
>
> GPA? I don't care if it's 2.0 or 4.0. I won't even look at it. The school you went to? I'll judge you the same whether you went to Nowhere State U or a top-ten school. Transcripts? Never seen one. GREs? Irrelevant.
>
>
>
Sadly, I don't think this is all that common. How a professor chooses a student varies a lot, and I don't think your GPA etc will be irrelevant to some profs. Especially not if you are in a number-driven, cold-heart-competitive place...
What's more common however is that your grades won't be the only criteria. They will most likely not be a deal-breaker. You will most likely get a chance to explain why you did good on some courses and worse on others. Primarily you will get a chance to explain what you *like* to do with your career.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is highly dependent on the program. Two programs that I applied to were polar opposites and demonstrate the variety in a very succinct way, I think.
School 1:
* GPA south of 3.5? don't bother applying.
* GRE quant scores south of 700(1)? don't bother applying.
* Never published or fewer than 5 years professional experience? Seriously, why are you wasting our time.
School 2:
* GPA north of 3.3 are preferred, GPA north of 3.5 will get preference, but we can work with you.
* GRE scores should be submitted if you have them and they are still valid.
* It is strongly recommended that you have relevant academic or industry experience
The only real difference between the program admissions is that school 1 accepted baccalaureates on a straight path to PhD and school 2 requires a recent masters degree in one of a few rather specific fields.
This was my experience but your mileage may vary. As I say, it's very dependent on the program.
(1) I don't claim to understand the new-fangled system, sorry.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The more popular the school and program, the more likely it will use test scores and transcript grades as "screening tools" to weed out uncompetitive applications. However, there are probably reasonable thresholds that exist on both measures; exceed those, and your exact GPA and GRE scores probably won't be taken into much consideration.
Ultimately, though, GPA should play a much stronger role in GRE, if only in the sense that somebody who does outstandingly in the core classes but struggles in "general education" classes that don't pertain to the field will probably have an easier time than somebody who has a better overall GPA, but weaker grades in the major. GRE scores are only correlated with performance in coursework; I don't think it has much to do with actual aptitude for research (although it may have some correlation).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: This depends greatly on the field. I have been in graduate admissions committees in two different fields.
Field A: the subject GRE in this field is a joke. The committee doesn't look at it, and doesn't look much at the regular GRE's. It's all recommendation letters and grades in the relevant courses.
Field B: the subject GRE in this field is very difficult. The committee is very reluctant to take anybody who scored less than the 90th percentile on the GRE. (Of course, you have to have good grades and recommendation letters as well.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/05 | 686 | 2,633 | <issue_start>username_0: Does your country have any academic degrees after the PhD? If yes, what is it called and how graduating this degree?
Additionally, what is a Post-Doc? Is it a degree or something else? I have seen some people refer to a post-doc in their CV as they would a degree. Is this acceptable?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, a PhD is the highest degree you can get. A postdoc is simply a research position that is not permanent, i.e. no fixed contract or tenure. There are some exceptions, for example in the German system where you can get your Habilitation, which is a degree after you get your PhD. But in most systems there is nothing beyond a PhD in terms of degrees.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As @username_1 pointed out, the highest degree level is a Doctorate (Dr) however, with this in mind, there are different academic titles that you can gain if you work at a University or high-educational institute. Here are a few:
* Senior Lecturer (Usually appointed to a academic with a level of experience, this is usually how many years they have been at a University).
+ Master Lecturer (This is usually a rank about a Senior Lecturer)
+ Reader (This is someone who usually has a vast amount of knowledge and a strong academic background who is employed by the University not so much to lecturer, but, to carry out research for the university).
+ Professor (*I believe this title is different in the US* but this title is given to an academic who has an outstanding background in research and has published books, received a lot of funding for the particular University.) A Professorship is not something that can be studied for, it is something that is achieved and you are selected for by a special panel.
You can find more about titles [here](http://euro.ecom.cmu.edu/titles/titlebook.htm)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Many countries have higher degrees than the PhD.
[In the UK](http://www.uea.ac.uk/calendar/section3/regs%28awards%29/doctor-of-laws,-of-letters-and-of-science), there's
* Litt.D Doctor of Letters / Literature
* DSc Doctor of Science
* LL.d Doctor of Laws
* D.D. Doctor of Divinity
Each of these typically requires the submission of a body of work - a research portfolio - together with a critique of the work. Or they may be awarded as honorary degrees; see the links above for the requirements for the degrees from the University of East Anglia (Litt.D, DSc, LL.d), and the University of Oxford (D.D.), accordingly.
A post-doc is just an academic research job that's typically done after attaining a PhD. It's not a degree in its own right
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/06 | 627 | 2,818 | <issue_start>username_0: Imagine an education model in which teacher/supervisor/mentor does not teach the syllabus to students. Instead, just pushing them towards key topics, and students must study by themselves. The teacher only control/supervise students to keep studying in right direction, but no professional teaching.
This is something like supervising academic research projects at graduate level.
I am curious if there is a pedagogical model/category/method of this kind for education (at lower levels)? For example, is there any example for teaching by this method in any school or university around the world? If yes, what is it called? I had no appropriate keyword to search for it.<issue_comment>username_1: At the Rochester Institute of Technology in Rochester, NY, USA. There are two ways in which this can happen. We have an independent study in which the student will learn about a topic with some guidance from a professor and write a paper about it, this has a broad variety of possibilities only some may fall into your category. One thing that everyone does is a senior design or capstone project where there is generally a faculty adviser but the student works to apply what you he or she has learned and present at the end of the year. This is in many ways similar working on a thesis, but as an undergraduate will take less time and be less intense. This is used in at least in the engineering school and physics department.
There is somewhat a third way, but does not contribute to the students transcript unless the student specifically does an internship for a research group. This is undergraduate research, and the student will contribute to research projects ongoing at the university that have faculty overseeing. In this scenario you may be mentored more by graduate students than faculty or staff.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Problem-based learning is one approach that fits your description. From [wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem-based_learning)
>
> Problem-based learning (PBL) is a student-centered pedagogy in which students learn about a subject through the experience of problem solving. Students learn both thinking strategies and domain knowledge. The goals of PBL are to help the students develop flexible knowledge, effective problem solving skills, self-directed learning, effective collaboration skills and intrinsic motivation. Problem-based learning is a style of active learning.
>
>
>
A related approach is [inquiry-based learning](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquiry-based_learning), which allows the idea to be used on a much smaller scale than problem-based learning, which, based on what I have read, tends to be rather resource intensive and require vast amounts of planning from the teaching staff.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/03/06 | 1,191 | 5,020 | <issue_start>username_0: Sometimes, I have been noticing some postdoc open position announcements that, besides the usual prerequisites (PhD, an excellent CV, programming skills, etc.), asked the candidates to have publications in the most important conferences in the field.
[For example](http://mine.kaust.edu.sa/Pages/JoinUs.aspx):
>
> [...] Candidates need to hold an earned Ph.D. (or be near completion)
> in computer science or in a related field with good programming skills
> in C/C++/Java/Matlab. Successful candidates are expected to be
> self-motivated and have **a good publication record (at least have one
> paper accepted by premier conferences or journals like KDD**, **NIPS**,
> **ICML**, **IJCAI**, **AAAI**, **SIGMOD**, **VLDB**, **ICDE**, **TKDE**, **TKDD**, etc.) and good
> command of English. [...]
>
>
>
I was quite surprised to read announcements like this (if one made an excellent research, who cares where it has been published?).
Are cases like these rare or quite common?
To get hired for an academic position (like postdoc for example), is it so important to publish in top-level conferences?
Is the conference fame considered **more important** than the paper scientific relevance for a hiring process?<issue_comment>username_1: I can't comment on whether the practice of explicitly pointing out that publishing in top conferences makes a stronger record is common, although I suspect it is taken for granted rather than spelled out. But, from the perspective of a hiring committee, being published in a top conference generally indicates that
1. The research is excellent.
2. The work has been peer reviewed by other top researchers in the field.
Both of these indicators will give a hiring committee a better feel for a candidate's potential for future top quality work.
By publishing in a lesser conference or journal and without those indicators, a closer reading of the publication would be necessary to make a better judgement.
To comment on your question about whether the conference is more important than the work: for most people, I would assume (and hope) the work itself is more important. But the reality is that hiring committees need to differentiate candidates, and judging by conference/journal quality is one way to accomplish that goal. Additionally, trying to read all candidates' papers, and then trying to judge the worth of the research without necessarily being an expert in the sub-fields themselves, would probably be futile at worst, and frustrating at best.
Finally, strong letters in support of the candidate are probably almost as important as the research itself, especially if the letters point in particular to example publications that demonstrate outstanding work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe it is not rare, at least when considering the [DBWorld](http://research.cs.wisc.edu/dbworld/browse.html) calls. CS is oriented towards conferences and people value top conferences more than anything else. Although I am just young researcher, I may say **people are going crazy for publishing in top conferences** in CS. I saw some professors target only and only top conferences.
I do not know whether this is a good thing to the field and I wish to hear from experienced researcher in the field how things was before 10 or 15 years.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The requirement to have a strong publication record on top-tier conferences is very common and it is important when you look for academic positions. I believe it is well-known and well-accepted among the researchers. I study databases and when I started my Ph.D., my advisor told me that he wants me to have three to four publications before graduation. When he talked about where to publish them, these were the exact words he used, "*Having one ICDE does not hurt*." What do you think this implies?
I fully agree with you by saying "if a research is excellent, who cares where it is published". But my friend, just as in all human activities, hiring committees always seek to achieve the job with the lowest cost. With more and more Ph.D. and PostDocs going into the job market, the committee members definitely have no time to read in detail the research of every applicant. Considering you are a committee member having 100 resumes at hand for one position, but you can only arrange 10 interviews. what is the fastest way to filter some candidates out? You know the answer.
All the efforts in a hiring process are simply to make you outstanding among competitors. Top-tier publications, strong recommendations, etc. When everyone has them, you have to have them. You also ask "Is the conference fame considered more important than the paper scientific relevance for a hiring process?". Well not always. For example, a "Best Paper Award" in ICDE may count more than a regular VLDB (I am actually not sure about this.) But people believe a regular SIGMOD/VLDB is better than a regular ICDE or EDBT, which is most of the time true.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/03/06 | 3,158 | 13,001 | <issue_start>username_0: First of all let me apologize for the title, as it is perhaps very vague. The issue is as follows; I have stopped printing my articles and instead starting reading them on screen via my library manager software (Papers2).
The problem is that I find it's MUCH harder to focus when I am reading on screen and thus takes much longer for me to read articles on a screen. It's almost like I get some sort of digital dyslexia... As possible reasons, I figure small things like new mail notifications, screen brightness, sitting/standing posture etc all weigh in somehow. But I suspect that the subliminal association of "how I normally read stuff on a screen" might have a larger effect. In other words since I am normally skimming through stuff when I am in front of the screen, my brain might try to take in information the same way when I am trying to read an article, which of course is a recipe for failure...
I wonder if it's just me or if this is a common phenomenon? Additionally I would appreciate if I could get some tips on how to tackle this problem. Obviously printing all papers is an option but it's neither elegant (creates a mess on/around my desk) nor is it environment-friendly.<issue_comment>username_1: I have terrible eyes and this is a very real problem for me. Although I'm not an eye care specialist I can say anecdotally that there are a few things that have really made all the difference for me.
First: if you wear glasses, get the computer lenses. Usually they are some kind of an off yellow to cut glare. These really help to reduce eye strain.
Second: look away from the screen every few minutes. Try to focus on objects away from the screen that let you change your focal distance. I find that doing this for just a few moments at the end of every paragraph really helps.
EDIT: Use natural light if you can. I've found that turning my desk so that the ambient light from the window illuminates my screen has also helped me a lot. You have to be careful of glare but when I finally got everything situated it made a notable difference.
Third: media counts a lot. If you're going to use a tablet or eReader look for something that has front/side lighting. Many people like the new Kindle paperwhite but I prefer the Kobo glo. If you're looking for a more stationary solution then I highly recommend a good projector. Prices have come down quite a bit and you can now get an 'OK' projector for just a couple of hundred dollars. It will take a little bit to acclimate yourself to the new reading format but once you do I think you'll find that you like it. I know that I do.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you have a Nook/Kindle I've found it surprisingly easier to read on those devices. Kindle allows you to email files to that device and it appears in just a few min. There are glitches of course, but I find it a good middle ground.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I have a similar issue with reading on screen. There doesn't seem to be a commercial A4-sized e-ink reader, which is what I'd ideally read digital copies on.
So, when I'm onlu skimming a paper, I'll do it on-screen.
But whenever I'm serious about digesting a paper, I've switched back to printing it out.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I suggest a number of things to consider.
1) If you're suffering from glare issues or similar, try to reposition yourself so that the light comes from behind your monitor and reduces glare.
2) As has been suggested in comments, try a tablet. I personally use an iPad for much of my paper reading and it works well. Some advocate the smaller tablets because of their lighter weight (the iPad does feel a little heavy over time, and it's hard to hold in one hand for long amounts of time).
The benefit of an iPad or another tablet is that it feels much more like reading paper than sitting at a computer does. You can sit down at a couch or in a chair and lounge back. In addition, the iPad has a high-quality screen. You can also easily make annotations with good software. I personally use iAnnotate, but there are many options.
3) Many computer monitors, and especially laptop screens, are poor quality. If you want to do a lot of reading on the computer but do not want to try a tablet, consider getting a good-quality external monitor.
Most monitors are TN monitors, which have good response times, but have poor contrast ratios, poor viewing angles, and poor color accuracy, as well as limited refresh rates. IPS panels, in contrast, have much higher everything, but are more expensive. The vast majority of laptop displays, for example, are TN panels, as are the vast majority of computer monitors under $350 (at the 24" size). It may be worth looking at a higher-quality monitor if you believe that it will help your reading and you want to persist reading on the computer.
If you're trying to read on a television-as-a-monitor, don't. Television screens aren't good for text reading.
A benefit with getting a monitor is that larger monitors generally make people more productive, so even if you buy a monitor and still decide not to read from the screen, you're probably going to still benefit from it work-wise.
--
Basically, your mileage will vary. I've heard of people who have no problems with reading on screens (I'm one of them, though I did get some strain after a while and ended up switching to iPad for much of my reading). I've also heard of people who see flicker and get eye strain viewing certain monitors, with varying severity - some had severe pain after minutes of ANY monitor.
Personally, I feel that if you're still struggling to be productive after a week or two with new hardware (and, hardware is NOT cheap) then I'd consider just going back to paper. While the amount of paper that you have to archive and throw out can be sometimes rather depressing, it's actually a rather cheap alternative compared to purchasing a $500 tablet or monitor which has toxic waste, metal, and unrecyclable materials.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I write long policy documents and instead of printing them, I tend to proof-read them on the screen.
I use perhaps the most inexpensive way: the 'text to speech' program. This is inbuilt in the Mac computer. I aware there are better programs available but they are not free.
I basically highlight the text and press the key combination and the computer reads the text back to me. All I do is follow the document on the screen without too much effort. No eye strain etc.
This is quite relaxing as you can hear the words and in the case of proofreading you can gauge the quality of the pros etc.
It works with all types of documents (pdfs and even webpages).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Even I had similar problem, I asked few people I know & I came to know about this software called F.Lux. It provides a different lighting according to the time. And you can set it as per your convenience. I suggest you to give it a try :
<http://stereopsis.com/flux/>
It's a freeware, available for Windows/Mac & even for iOS (jailbroken) & Android.
My second suggestion is to look away from screen for ever few mins. Currently I use a timer to remind me (sometimes I even forget this lol) & I make sure to look away from screen for every 30-45 mins. For this I use Time Out app in my Mac. Similar app should be available for your OS too.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Lisa has a good point but I'll just go into a little more depth with my experience (perhaps a little too much for a comment).
I use a Kindle DX (e-ink, big) and while it's not perfect it is so much better than a tablet. I find that reading on a tablet or monitor my eyes become quite tired quite quickly, but not with e-ink displays. The problem is that the Kindle (at least mine) does not zoom well into PDFs. However, the Nook (e-ink) did (sister has one) and even for my Kindle I can use Calibre (free) to convert PDFs to the native Kindle format. Calibre does work well for text-heavy articles (if there are not too many columns - the simpler the better) but if you have a lot of creative formatting, it's not quite so great.
The nice thing about the Kindle DX is that you can hold it on the side and you can read PDF articles well by jumping back and forth (read top 1/2 of first column in one view, then next page to view the bottom 1/2, then previous page to read the top 1/2 of the other column, etc.).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: In addition to the above suggestions, I find problems with text that stretches too far across the page. In that case, I do a copy and paste to a Word document, then put the text into columns.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: Get a large (22" or 24") display with 16:9 aspect ratio that has a mount that will allow you to put the display in portrait mode. You'll also need a video card that can support portrait mode display (most do this nowadays). This is ideal for reading PDF journal articles formatted for print because you can see a whole page at a time without wasting screen real estate or squinting to read tiny fonts.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: I think one big reason I dislike reading on screens is the fact that I am basically shining a flashlight in my eyes for hours.
With software, this is less of a problem for two reasons: First off, the visual scheme is designed for a monitor (and not designed for paper but shown on a monitor like with books or articles). Second, the image is very dynamic, so paper isn't an alternative anyhow.
The first thing to try is to turn down the brightness of your monitor. This may seem to make it very dark at first, but backlight is different from contrast. I find that I easily get used to the lowest brightness setting on my monitors after an hour or so. If the wall or desk space behind your computer is dark, you may also want to put a weak desk lamp so that it shines behind your monitor and reduces the contrast of the wall vs. your screen.
If you do a lot of reading, you should consider rotating your monitor (most newer mounts support this) to have it oriented in portrait instead of landscape.
[F.lux](https://justgetflux.com/) was already mentioned, and it can be very helpful, but I think it's more to do with effects of using a computer at late hours at home. At noon, a f.lux filtered screen will look about the same as without a filter anyway. If you are lucky enough to have a fancy monitor, you might even find sophisticated software to control contrast and brightness.
I have had a much better experience reading books on a Kindle. Because the screen is not backlighted, but instead gets illuminated by ambient lighting, it is much less irritating. Unfortunately the PDF support of Kindles isn't very good, you must scroll through each page as if it was a picture, and for papers which have small type, multiple columns and frequently refer to figures on other pages, the Kindle's interface will dirve you crazy. Kindle DX has a larger screen, about 8", though still not as big as a paper.
An alternative is, if you can find an HTML version of your article, to read that in your Kindle using the Web Browser.
Since you are stuck on a computer, I would recommend reading in a software such as Foxit Reader, which have very nice tools for highlighting and annotating. You could even invest in a drawing tablet such as Wacom to help you draw on figures and so on.
IMO this is a lost cause and you should print articles. You have read books and papers from actual paper for decades of your life, including in childhood. Your brain and your eyes are probably accustomed to it much better, and there might be psychological cues which help you focus (not to mention distraction on the computer like email, software popups and so on).
The paper consumption can be quite big, but honestly, how many "more important" uses for paper are there besides scientific research? In any case;
* You can use low-grade, recycled paper
* You can print on both sides, or reuse single-side paper as scratch paper
* You can recycle your own papers after you read them
* Only print papers that you actually want to read, instead of skim for 5 minutes (this should consume a very small amount of paper compared to your other daily activities)
Like you say, it's easy to end up with a huge mess. But that's a question of being organized. If you are a little proactive and develop a reasonable filing system (even a few manilla folders with labeled tabs can do wonders), you can keep the vast majority of the clutter under control very easily.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: There are several relatively new 13.3' e ink devices on the market now that could give you what you are looking for — good experience of reading articles digitally, making notes on the margins and highlighting parts of the text: Two Boox Max; Fujitsu Quaderno A4; Sony Digital Paper 13.3; QuirkLogic Papyr; Ratta Supernote.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/03/06 | 870 | 3,581 | <issue_start>username_0: How do I formulate research interests in my CV? When talking about my field, I like to include some context, such as:
>
> The climate of planet Earth is a complex system. Detailed observations are needed for improving our understanding of individual components and their interaction. Additionally, long-term, large-scale monitoring is required to study the climate system in its entirety. Observations from space are important for both kinds of observations. I am particularly interested in applying space-based observations the atmosphere, for example, for the hydrological cycle. Additionally, I think foo is important because of bar, and would like to research foo deeper.
>
>
>
But on a CV, space and attention are scarce. An alternative would be:
>
> * Space-based observations of the atmosphere
> * Foo
>
>
>
But this appears a bit bald to me. I think the context, the motivation, should be relevant: *why* are my research interests as they are?
What is a better alternative for describing research interests on a CV?<issue_comment>username_1: An advice I got when I started worrying about how to form my CV was to include a short paragraph under the title "Profile" which would practically be the only freetext bit of the CV, where I *describe* myself in short and to-the-point sentences. The rest of the CV was supposed to be sort of an enumeration of what I have done, what I can do etc etc.
So I think if you want to have your research interests in your CV, it would make sense to purify the core of what you want to say and plug that into such a "profile". Alternative, or rather a complement, to that would be to mention your research interests in a cover letter which you would most likely need to write for any position you'll be applying to.
I guess it all depends on what kind of a CV you are going for.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't even use bullets; just provide a list of keywords/phrases identifying your subfield. At least in the US, departments ask for a separate research statement in addition to your CV. That's the place to explain your research interests in detail and give them context; there's no need to do that in your CV, too.
For example, when I applied for faculty positions, my CV included the following lines between my contact information and my education history.
>
> **Research Interests**
>
>
> Algorithms, data structures, and lower bounds; computational and discrete geometry; computer graphics
>
>
>
I've served on the faculty recruiting committee in my (top-10 US computer science) department for several years; this approach seems both standard and effective. Personally, when I read a CV, I only spend a second or two on the self-declared research interests and jump straight to the publication list.
(Posdef's answer suggests giving more context in your cover letter, but I think this is pointless. I don't know anyone who has ever read a cover letter.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> What is a better alternative for describing research interests on a CV?
>
>
>
1. **include a brief (1-3 sentences) free form blob, basically a research statement**. Something like this:
>
> I work to remedy the effects of human air pollution of natural environment. I focus on monitoring quality of air and water quality in urban areas, especially XYZ. My main achievements include A, B and C.
>
>
>
2. **include a list of keywords of your research interests** underneath the blob.
The blob and keywords should fit to the first page of the CV package.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/06 | 649 | 2,687 | <issue_start>username_0: Sabbatical leave is very common as it is nice to spend a year as a visiting professor in another university and experience a new environment.
It is very beneficial for the host university to have temporary faculty members free of charge (no salary is normally paid by the host university). **(1) How do host universities attempt (if they do) to attract visiting professors?** Of course, there are job advertisements for hiring visiting professors, but I think they are paid positions and different from normal sabbatical leave.
Visiting for research purposes should be arranged with the leader of the host research group. Thus, the arrangement is at a personal level (somewhat similar to hiring a postdoc researcher.
Visiting for education purposes should be arranged at the level of the department chair.
**(2) How can a professor find a visiting professor? Is it chancy? to meet a colleague interested to host?** Or s/he must contact many professors and department chairs to find a vacancy?
***(1) & (2) Who should actually initiate this process? The guest professor or host university?***
(possible 3) Is there a system to facilitate this process, as it is of mutual interest, or everything is left to chance? For example, European Union emphasizes the mobility of students/professors through different programmes. Is there such a system for sabbatical visits (in its classical form of completely working at the host university for a period of time, not guest lecturing as it is common in Europe).<issue_comment>username_1: I do not have direct experience with sabbaticals, however the professors I've known that have taken them have been explicitly sought out for the respective sabbatical at a particular institution (as a visiting professor), by colleagues that they personally know professionally (i.e., from being in the same field and interacting via conferences, collaborations, etc.).
In other words, it boils down to networking, and almost certainly doesn't come out of nowhere. If a professor is planning a sabbatical, he or she will probably already have colleagues willing to host, or will start the process by calling up a colleague and pitching the idea. I would gather that it isn't likely that there are too many successful cold-calls to departments that lead to sabbaticals.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Each time I've taken a sabbatical, it has started with an email (or, in years past, a letter). Write to the person (or people) you would like to collaborate with, and let them know you have a sabbatical coming up. Of course, knowing them already will make it much more likely to be successful.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/03/07 | 2,310 | 8,536 | <issue_start>username_0: In the discussion made in comments to this [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8330/what-does-prof-dr-ir-mean), it has been stated that in France, it is possible (though improbable) to become a professor without having PhD. It made me curious if there is such possibility in the United States. I know that in 1970s there were leading professors in the US university who had only MSc. However, I think the main focus was on knowledge in the past, but now formalities are much more important.
Anyway, I am curious if the current regulations in the US universities allows this at all? For promotion to full professor, one needs to be assistant/associate professor. In the past, having a PhD was privilege, but it is now mandatory for holding any assistant/associate/full professor.
Does the current regulations allow a professor without PhD to teach PhD students?
This question is about impossibility vs. improbability.<issue_comment>username_1: [<NAME>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Casson) never completed his Ph.D. and is a Professor at Yale University (and was previously a Professor at UT Austin and UC Berkeley).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: At most US institutions, you need the [terminal degree](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_degree) in your field. For many fields this is a PhD, but in some it might be an [EdD](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Education), a [DMA](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Musical_Arts), a [DPH](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Public_Health), a [ThD](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Theology), etc. However, all of these degrees are considered to one level or another to be research doctorates. Presumably faculty positions at a medical school require an MD or equivalent. Likewise for other professional schools. Positions in the visual arts, theater, dance, creative writing, cinematography, etc., may only require the [MFA (Master of Fine Arts)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_Fine_Arts) degree, as it is considered to be the terminal degree in those fields.
"Regulations" about the requirements to hold certain academic ranks and perform certain academic duties (like mentor graduate students) are made at the institutional level.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Short answer - it depends. You mention teaching PhDs, so I assume you don't mean community or state colleges where a PhD may not necessarily be required. If you mean tenure-track or tenured professor at a "University", then I would say it's difficult, although certainly not impossible. To make a blanket statement applying to all U.S. institutions would just be silly. But I would consider it a rare occurrence for a non-PhD to step into the tenure-track role.
There are a number of non-tenure track professorships (adjunct, teaching, practicing professional, or whatever title an institution gives them) that don't necessarily require PhDs. Note that these professorships are typically focused on teaching rather than scholarly research and usually don't come with any tenure guarantees.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I was thrown out of a small mid-western college (not a university) in my first year. I was persuaded to apply to Harvard about 8 years later. I took the exams and was admitted. I paid my way by working a 40 hr/week full-time job, admittedly against the rules, at an electronics firm throughout the 4 years. I graduated with a decent, but not outstanding A.B. in a scientific field, and had, incidentally, become Chief Electronics Engineer at the firm where I had been employed. This was followed by employment in diverse research environments, then in a think-tank in Cambridge and, finally with two offers of tenured full professorship at major universities. I took one, and thus became a full professor at a major university without ever having taken a course in graduate school or having had any prior appointment as Assistant or Associate Professor. I am currently Professor Emeritus and continue to direct PhD candidates. The answer to the question is, therefore, YES
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Another counterexample: [<NAME>](http://www.bard.edu/academics/faculty/faculty.php?action=details&id=2847), who joined the Bard faculty in 2005 and received tenure in 2010 if I am not mistaken. Admittedly, Bard does not grant doctorates, but it is regarded as a strong liberal arts college.
I'm under the impression that there are strong incentives to have faculty with terminal degrees for accreditation purposes, but historically it was not unusual and you can find more recent examples, though they certainly fall in the improbable category.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Whether you get special consideration probably depends on how special you are. [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Conway) joined the University of Michigan as a full professor of EE and CS in 1985 with only an MSEE. But she had some other stuff going for her, like having co-created the Mead-Conway revolution in chip design. She didn't have a PhD but she had already become a Fellow of the IEEE.
Lynn is a friend of mine and when I've asked her about her appointment, she's waived the question away, insisting that exceptions can always be made. But I'm a lecturer today in that same UM EECS department where she held her appointment before retiring and when I recently asked our chairman if it could still be done today, he insisted it would never happen. Not anymore.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: The ability to enter academia without a PhD varies substantially by faculty. In faculties that train people for "the professions" it is more common to encounter academics that have come from a professional background but do not have a PhD. For example, many academics in Law faculties are professional solicitors and barristers and their expertise comes from this background, rather than from a postgraduate research degree. Many academics in Medicine faculties are medical doctors who do not have PhDs (though they still have the title "Dr" from their medical degrees). The same is broadly true of other "professions" such as Actuarial Mathematics, some areas of Business and Commerce, so areas of Engineering, etc.
Having said this, there is no doubt that the situation is changing rapidly over time, due to a rapid increase in the supply of PhD graduates in all faculties (see e.g., [Cyranoski et al 2011](https://www.nature.com/news/2011/110420/full/472276a.html), [McCook 2011](https://www.nature.com/news/2011/110420/full/472280a.html), [Larson, Ghaffarzadegan and Xue 2014](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4309283/pdf/nihms562644.pdf)). As the pool of PhD graduates increases, there is greater competition in credentials for academic positions, particularly at entry level. This seems to be leading to a situation where entry-level academics are expected to have a PhD. In some places this is now mandatory (see e.g., [Gibney 2018](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/doctoral-level-thinking-non-phds-need-not-apply/422244.article), [Baker 2018](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/mandatory-phd-policies-lead-boom-academics-doctorates)). Growth in PhD graduates and the resultant inflation of entry-level qualifications has been so rapid that there is growing concerns of an oversupply of PhDs that cannot be absorbed into academia
(see e.g., [The Economist 2010](https://www.economist.com/node/17723223)). Senior academics who entered the university system prior to this boom have usually achieved enough in research and their profession that having this degree is not an important addition, so there are still many academics at higher levels without PhDs. However, for people seeking entry into academia at lower levels, the proportion of entrants with PhDs is increasing rapidly.
Speaking from personal experience (though not at US universities), when I went through university in the late 1990s and early 2000s (in Australia) there were many academics without PhDs, mostly in the faculties listed above. In the Law faculty at my university, most academics were professional lawyers, and less than a quarter held a PhD. In the Actuarial school, the academics were actuaries, and none of them held a PhD (though one was working towards it). Encountering an academic without a PhD was extremely common. Since this time it has become uncommon to encounter an entry-level academic without a PhD.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/03/07 | 459 | 1,752 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing my thesis and came across an image on Wikipedia that I would like to use. The licensing on this image is:
>
> I, the copyright holder of this work, release this work into the public domain. This applies worldwide.
> In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so:
> I grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.
>
>
>
Should I still include a reference to indicate this image is not my own work, if so, who should be given credit (the author is not known in this case)?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Should I still include a reference to indicate this image is not my
> own work
>
>
>
**YES** If the idea is not yours, you need to reference it.
>
> Who should be given credit
>
>
>
That is a harder question. Ideally, you should find the original author/source. Given a reasonable attempt to find the original author/source fails then reference the secondary/reproduction (i.e., wikipedia/wikimedia).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Here are the recommendations from [Wikimedia Commons](http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reusing_content_outside_Wikimedia):
>
> Content in the public domain may not have a strict legal requirement
> of attribution (depending on the jurisdiction of content reuse), but
> attribution is recommended to give correct provenance.
>
>
> Other restrictions may apply. These may include trademarks, patents,
> personality rights, moral rights, privacy rights, or any of the many
> other legal causes which are independent of copyright and vary greatly
> by jurisdiction.
>
>
>
The rest of the page is very informative as well.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/03/07 | 620 | 2,791 | <issue_start>username_0: A school that I am applying has a list of available topics, along with their descriptions, which I can choose from. I already select one topic which matches my interest and background, I also contact a professor who will supervise on that topic and he encourages me to go for it. However, as the application process, I need to write a research proposal. It makes me confused as the topic and research description are already defined. I can add some comments on the topic and then relate my background to it, but it will be a personal statement instead of research proposal. So, I wonder in other universities, what students are expected to write in their research proposals when they select a pre-defined topics.<issue_comment>username_1: I would ask the professor who encouraged you to apply what the best strategy is.
In any case, a good idea is to take the topic proposed in the list you mention and write about that. Make it your own. Try to develop your own approach to the topic. Elaborate more on what needs to be done. Explore some related work a find out what has been written. This will help demonstrate that you have what it takes to be a (top) PhD student.
Avoid simply writing a personal statement on top of the research proposal. They probably want to see how you think about the research topic and would approach it.
If possible, get the professor to help you out. Not by doing the writing, but by providing comments and possibly related work. (Note that professors are busy, so s/he may not have time to do this.)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A research proposal should address several things, whether the topics are predefined or not. Yes, you propose a topic but you also want to address: why you selected your topic, any background you might have in that area, how you intend to approach your research, methodologies you intend to employ, relevant standards and rigor, and (possibly the most important) how your research on the chosen topic will advance the related body of knowledge in your discipline. Of course this would all be at a very high level but it should all work toward advancing your argument. I think it also helps to keep in mind that any research proposals or statements that you write are intended to be persuasive in nature. When the reader finishing reviewing their proposal there should be no doubt that you're the best person to do what you want to do, and if you don't do it there will be a potential void of knowledge in your discipline. All you have to do is convince them of that.
Final tips: edit often, get lots of test readers, revise-revise-revise, and when you submit it - let it go and don't let it get to you. I've seen people drive themselves nuts waiting to hear back.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/03/07 | 496 | 1,960 | <issue_start>username_0: I had two papers approved for a workshop in a IEEE conference and I'm going to send the camera-ready version soon.
Is it OK to have one paper cite the other? If it's OK, do I have to reference the other paper as "to appear"?<issue_comment>username_1: It is okay for each paper to cite the other.
It would be better if more accurate publication details were given. Sometimes the published will add this information (this happens at Springer for LNCS volumes). Perhaps you can alert the editor of the fact, and they might be able to make sure that you have the right information for the citation or they can ensure that the publishers do the right thing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is acceptable, and fairly common. You cite as usual, and the citation itself would be identical to a standard citation with the exception that the date and page numbers would be replaced by the phrase "in press".
From the [American Historical Association's "Professional Standards" page](http://www.historians.org/PUBS/Free/ProfessionalStandards.cfm#Reputation):
>
> The AHA suggests the following lexicon.
>
>
> * "In Press": the manuscript is fully copyedited and out of the author's hands. It is in the final stages of the production process.
> * "Forthcoming": a completed manuscript has been accepted by a press or journal.
> * "Under contract to . . .": a press and an author have signed a contract for a book in progress, but the final manuscript has not yet been submitted.
> * "Submitted" or "under consideration": the book or article has been submitted to a press or journal, but there is as yet no contract or agreement to publish.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Yes, it's fine. I would probably cite it as follows:
>
> First Author and Second Author. This is the title of this paper, which is also found several times in the paper itself. These *Proceedings*, 2013.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/03/08 | 1,234 | 5,487 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a professor and researcher in mathematics and my research is kind of on the theoretical side. Online, I discovered a mathematician who had written some papers with ideas similar to mine, and we corresponded and discussed possible collaboration. Then he wrote an entire paper, listing both of us as authors on the front page, and sent it to me. I didn't think it ethical to take any credit for a paper I had no part in writing, so I discontinued all contact with this person. Has anyone here had a similar experience? How common is this?
I am becoming very disillusioned with the pure research game. People spend huge amounts of time on self-promotion because there just isn't that much demand for their work.<issue_comment>username_1: I have heard stories about some (mostly weak) young mathematicians include the names of some people (influential enough) to facilitate the acceptance of their papers or to help them for employment, grants, etc. In fact, two years ago, an almost innocent case of this was going to happen to me. In Iran, most departments of mathematics have this (written or non-written) rule that a master or a PhD student should have at least one paper with his/her supervisor, otherwise she cannot graduate or she misses some points from her thesis grade. I had a master student and she wanted to get the highest grade and therefore she asked me if I allow her to write a weak paper and include my name as a co-author of the paper. I deny it and she missed 1 (out of 20) from her thesis grade. Of course, to compensate the 1 point unfair reduction, I defended her and asked the jury to not reduce any more points from her grade.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Without knowing too many details of your situation, could you perhaps give the other author the benefit of the doubt? Cutting off all contact does seem harsh (unless you have other reasons) for what could simply be a misunderstanding.
I don't know the conventions of your field, but it seems in many science fields that authors are added if they contribute intellectual ideas on the research, not necessarily for doing the research. Other authors simply add support in some fashion, so get added. It is not uncommon to have many authors on a science paper. It does in fact get tricky because one can offend others by not including co-authors.
I'm of the opinion that it's probably better to include someone who contributed in some fashion than not include them. You could argue that this dilutes research and is a "pure research game", but honestly, one paper is not going to make or break anyone's career.
Could this author simply have been trying to extend kindness, or perhaps thought you had a bigger role in the research than you actually felt you did?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: To answer your stated question: the only general requirement for your authorship on a paper is that you contribute to the research significantly, and that generally doesn't imply co-writing it — contributing to the ideas can be significant, especially if the proof becomes trivial with an idea you contributed. (I've heard mathematicians describe "significant contribution" very differently — say, that PhD students are expected to draft papers, get advising and feedback from their supervisor, and not list their supervisor as coauthor — unless the student failed to contribute to the project).
Now, you have similar ideas. In my experience, tracking down who originated an idea among people who did work together can be very hard, and joint credit can be an easier solution which is accepted in our community (in Computer Science, Programming Languages).
However, since all authors are jointly responsible for the claims in the paper, I've been taught it's very bad style to add somebody to a draft without his permission; submitting the paper without your knowledge/consent would be unethical, but dropping contact is not only brisk, but ambiguous. Couldn't he genuinely (in good faith) think you were okay with the draft, but didn't have time to respond?
In fact, if he thinks you contributed to the research, to publish it ethically, he'll need either your agreement to have your name in, or your agreement to have your name out.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You were completely wrong in thinking it was unethical to co-author a paper you had no part in writing, or that the other person did anything wrong. Quite the contrary.
Contributions to papers may take very different form; one can merit a co-authorship without writing a word if one contributed essential ideas. As a famous example, Adelman of the RSA code fame did not participate in inventing the code; what he did was defeating dozens of previous attemps by Rivest and Shamir. When they came up with a proposal he could not defeat, they included him as a co-author.
By doing what they did, your correspondent simply acknowledged that discussions with you helped him to solve the problem, in which case it is customary to offer a co-authorship. Of course, you might feel differently, e. g., that you only communicated common knowledge, in which case it would be appropriate to decline the offer. But from other side, it was just new to them; how could they judge whether it's common knowledge or your unique perspective or the result of you thinking on this problem specifically? For them, it's only ethical to make sure they don't err on the wrong side of it.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/03/08 | 1,409 | 5,568 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate research assistant in a biology lab. I was having an informal conversation while working at lab with my professor and a colleague of him. In the middle of our conversation, my professor passed a racially insensitive remark at me (I can reproduce here if someone wants to know). However, he realized it and walked away immediately. I am very upset.
But after few hours, he came back and he was conversing with me like nothing happened, but I am still upset. Can you all tell me how to handle this? My options are to ask him if he did that unknowingly or to keep quiet. But I really want to know if he feels sorry for what he said. I really don't want to complain to his superiors, but I want him to apologize to me for what he said. Is this unreasonable? if not, how should I go about dealing with this person?<issue_comment>username_1: In your question, *However, he realized it and walked away immediately.* and *But after few hours, he came back and he was conversing with me like nothing happened*
indicate to me that he felt sorry and didn't know exactly how to deal with it.
Professors are also human. They make the same mistakes others do.
I would suggest you to talk to him in person about this incident **politely and seriously**. Tell him that you are upset with the remarks he made earlier and explain to him why. Don't be emotional.
Whether or not he will apologize is up to him. If he doesn't offer apology to you after you talk to him, then talk to his superiors if you want the apology.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I guess it depends on the personalities to a certain extent but it's always good to talk to the person, to weed out any misunderstandings and/or give that person a chance to explain him/her-self.
If I were in your shoes, I would start by asking the person if you can have a 1-to-1 meeting, during which I would take up:
* what you heard him/her say
* that it bothers you for reasons: A,B,C ...
* and that you wonder if he/she meant what was said, or if it was untimely and insensitive joke.
Given the offense is really bothering you, I personally wouldn't advocate for keeping quite and letting it go. Insensitivity aside, if your boss has racially-demeaning or insulting opinions, then it's probably not the kind of place you want to work at anyways. It would be better to know that...
I have to stress that even though my suggestion might seem confrontational, with right tone and choice of words I am certain it would not appear so to the professor in question. For reference, check out <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_Communication>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **He didn't mean it**. I am not sure whether it is a good idea to bring the issue again.
I think your professor felt sorry about it and thats why he left and came back (*a good indication he has nothing against you*).
**I really suggest not to make it public nor bring the issue again** and as long as he is a fair and kind professor, that is what you need. If the racial issue comes again, then that is another story.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You say you have two options - to ask or to ignore. Actually you have many options - infinitely many. One of these would be to get to know your professor better. This I recommend.
There are compusive disorders that impell people to say shocking things. Tourette's syndrome is an extreme case, but there are others. Sometimes we just do stupid things.Some people find it terribly hard to apologise. We humans are very complex.
username_1 knows what it feels like to live in inside another's skin.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: See if your campus offers **diversity training** (a Google search of `allintext:diversity training faculty site:edu` shows that many US institutions offer this).
If so, go to the organizers of the courses and ask for advice about what to do. Before you mention the name of the faculty member to them, ask what would be the consequence of giving that information.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Actually, I was in a very similar situation once. It didn't actually bother me as much as it seems to bother you.
But - I could tell on the inside that the professor in this situation, felt *really really* bad afterwards. I could tell that he was a good guy, but just made a mistake.
After that, he treated me extremely well in order to 'make up' for what he did. Though, I didn't say anything about it or ask for an apology.
If you really want an apology, confront him professionally about the issue. It was his mistake. And afterwards, I believe he will treat you with the at most respect in order to 'make up' for what he did.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I tend towards *not expecting an apology* at a gaffe. If it doesn't repeat, you can assume they were possibly mortified themselves. If you insist on an apology, you may even get it, but what's the point, beside making them lose face? (Well, some people expect that as compensation for themselves being insulted, but you should ask yourself if you really need this).
An apology which is given freely and by own initiative is worth by far the most.
If the offence repeats, you can assume it's not a gaffe. Now you could really insist on an apology, but in my experience, it shows more aplomb, and, in fact, is far more powerful, to then move towards acting coldly, aloof and professional. This shows *you're* the boss here and *they* the immature kid (even if age-wise, it's reversed).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/08 | 918 | 3,720 | <issue_start>username_0: I teach quite a few 'unprepared' students and I find they struggle with finding source material on which to base their reports. Basically, they need to read a lot and apply theories to different companies.
Where should I draw the line when giving them advice? I certainly do not do any searching or reading/filtering for them but if they choose a company and need to report on it, is it acceptable to give them some ideas about famous events at that company which might have happened a decade ago (or more but would still be acceptable for the purposes of the report)? Or, should I require them to do search, even for old events, and if they can't, then they can't and fail?<issue_comment>username_1: The purpose of teaching, which includes both your lectures, later guidance on their projects *and also includes evaluation*, is for them to learn new skills. So, the question you should ask yourself is: **what skills do I want them to learn, and how do I achieve that best?**
Typically, it seems to me that (if you have enough time for it), it is *very* important to teach them not only to read, filter and digest information, but also to search for it (Information Age and all). So, you might want to make “searching for relevant information” a required skill. But that doesn't mean you should help them acquire it. In fact, you probably should:
* advertise it as an important part of what they are expected to learn
* help them learn it, i.e. show them how it's done
* evaluate them based on their performance
However… even if you do all that, it still doesn't mean you can't help them if they miss something. After all, if you are teaching them how to best look for information, they might realize it's a good idea to come to the expert they know in that particular field… *you*, their teacher. So, maybe they will come asking
>
> here are the relevant events I found about X in the archives… do you think I missed something?
>
>
>
or even:
>
> I see a spike in the data around the fall of 1974, and I have searched but couldn't find any event possibly related to that company, do you know of anything that might explain it?
>
>
>
in which cases you might want to answer them, if it seems they did their due diligence.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think the problem most students are facing is **too much information on the net**.
For example, if your assignment for them is to figure out the *Impact of 2008 financial crisis to GM*.
If they google for "2008 financial crisis GM", they would get about 4,030,000 results.
The first one on the list is, *Scholarly articles for financial crisis 2008 GM*. If you click on that, you get 300,200 results. Do you expect them to read through all of them? I don't believe so.
I believe most undergrad student today do know how to search. But, they may have trouble with filtering them out because of the large volume of info they get on Internet.
In order to help them, you need to figure out how much time it would take them to find the info you want them to find, assuming they would do the search themselves.
In other words, you need to do the homework first. Pretend you know nothing about the subject. Search on the net. Find the info yourself. If you can do it in a reasonable time, then you can expect them to do it.
Using the example above, I cannot find the document you want me to find in a reasonable time frame unless you tell me specificly what you are after.
The line you want really depends on the assignment and student's willingness to learn. I don't think typing keywords is a problem, how to choose keywords and what to do after the search are what's troubling them.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/03/08 | 1,297 | 5,435 | <issue_start>username_0: I've had to grade quite a few essay papers in the classes I've taught, and I've suspected some may have plagiarized but I never really pursued check on them because it would be too time consuming to check their sources and pursue any/all possible sources where they may have copied from.
What's the easiest way to check for plagiarism? Is there a search engine tool that one could use to upload a paper and check for it? I doubt it, but other than that, I don't know of any other way to check for it than to put in more effort than I have time for.<issue_comment>username_1: In my department/university we have access to some systems for checking for plagiarism but most of us end up using Google, believe it or not. The reasons are that the plagiarism systems (we have access to) seem to work on a limited subset of work and that Google is extremely easy to use. My suspicion is that the existing systems may be tailored to specific subjects and may be excellent within these. So I would simply say, test your suspected essay by inserting sentences or even larger (key) parts of paragraphs into Google and see what comes out.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There are plenty of tools out there. The best 'seems' to be TurnItIn. It's costly so if the school won't pay for it, you might not be interested. My school does not so I found other options.
[Here is a tool](http://plagiarism.bloomfieldmedia.com/z-wordpress/software/wcopyfind/) called WCopyFind that is very good at finding plagiarism when one student copies from another but it will not find something online. After collecting papers for several semesters it has been catching more and more and most students take the same easy way out.
There are other options if you search for online plagiarism checking but they are not as robust as this tool above...however to really see the benefits, you need to maintain a library of old papers to compare against. What I like about it (besides being FOSS) is that it is highly configurable (consider a match 6 words in a row, or consider a match 9 words in a row where 70% of the words match). It all runs local (since there's no internet search) so it's quite fast.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: If your school uses blackboard, d2L, or something of the sort...plagiarism detection (if that's what we can call it) is built into the system. For blackboard, the program is called safeassign. Students submit their papers through safeassign (I'm convinced that just telling them about this program cuts down on plagiarism), and then the program gives you a report (ie 23% plagiarized). A couple of great things about the program: it gives you the source where the student lifted the information and keeps a running database of papers so that students cannot use each others assignments. It makes the process totally objective, and you won't have to worry....the program does all the work. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You can also do it yourself using google. Pick a single idiosyncratic phrase from the manuscript and search for it in quotes. It is amazing how often you will find search results have that same phrase followed by and preceded by the same words as in the paper. If so, you have found plagiarism. I once found a term paper substantially ripped off from a MS thesis (from a small schol in Australia) using this technique.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Recently, I had to check several texts for plagiarism, and I used a free plagiarism checking tool (you can [google for one](https://www.google.com/#q=free+online+plagiarism+checker), there are a few that are returned). You just copy and paste text there and if it is copied from any published source the tool will detect it and provide you with the link to the source. That's how you can actually check the accuracy of references as well. Though the tools are not designed for academic purposes, it works well for checking any kind of papers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Some of the plagiarism tools do not seem to be effective against bilingual students who plagiarize and then translate the works with machine translation. It only takes 1 minute to catch:
1. Select and copy a random sentence from the paper containing some rare words.
2. Paste this sentence into an on-line translation tool, set to translate from English to the student's L1.
3. Copy this output and search for it in your favorite search English.
4. If the search preview finds a sentence word-for-word match, copy that address.
5. Translate the whole address from that student's L1 to English and compare that with their paper.
Since most students who plagiarize are also lazy, many do not seem to bother with editing the translation, so I've caught many students who submitted papers in this fashion where the output from the Web translation service was identical to the output they gave me.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Please note that some "free plagiarism checkers" will turn around and sell the papers that are submitted to them to other students. Be careful with their use.
I find TurnItIn to be well worth the cost. Even though students can check their own papers through the system, this is a GOOD thing because it teaches students what is plagiarized and what is not. If the student has to make adjustments to ensure that they aren't plagiarizing, isn't that what we want them to do?
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/08 | 626 | 2,616 | <issue_start>username_0: I expect to be graduating with a maths BSc (with an honours year, in Australia) in the not-too-distant future. I’d like to pursue a PhD in pure maths, with the view of becoming a research mathematician. I’ve found it quite difficult to find information on what exactly the application process entails, and when I need to start worrying about it. I have some specific questions, but what I’m really interested in is if there’s a compiled source of advice and information for math PhD applicants internationally.
1. It seems that many universities have a specific (December in the USA) deadline, does this mean PhDs have to start at a particular time of year?
2. I see that occasionally people advertise a particular PhD position they’d like to fill, on some particular research topic. Is this kind of PhD different from the “generic” kind and have a different application process?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> 1. It seems that many universities have a specific (December in the USA)
> deadline, does this mean PhDs have to start at a particular time of
> year?
>
>
>
Usually, students apply on December for the Fall entry (August/September of the upcoming year).
>
> 2.I see that occasionally people advertise a particular PhD position they’d like to fill, on some particular research topic. Is this kind of PhD different from the “generic” kind and have a different application process?
>
>
>
Really can't ansnwer and it is case specific but usually such advertisements contain information about how to apply, expected time to start, minimum requirements and expected stipend (if there is any).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two main models of organizing doctoral programs:
* The American system: graduate students proceed through a combined master's and doctoral program, usually starting with coursework, then taking some sort of "qualifying exam" to become doctoral candidates within the department. Admissions are handled at the department level.
* The "German" system: doctoral candidates are *employees* rather than *students.* Candidates for a position must apply directly to the group of the professor who is sponsoring the project. There is no coursework phase, as applicants are expected to have already completed their master's degree. (However, they can "audit" courses if needed.)
I would suspect that these represent the "poles" of the spectrum; most other systems I'm aware of fall somewhere in between. [Note that even the German system is adopting some features of the American system, and is thus starting to become a hybrid.]
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/03/09 | 1,067 | 4,723 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing a thesis for my M.Sc. dissertation, and I am struggling to identify how big the contribution of my paper has to be.
I've heard professors in our campus saying "you don't have to save the world, just add a little bit of something to an already existing work." But that is vague and seems too little for an M.Sc. program. Do you have any advice on what could be considered a sufficient contribution?
Ps. My field is distributed systems (cloud computing) and it would be nice if you could explain it in that context.<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion and experience, it is relatively rare for an MSc thesis to yield truly original research resulting in a paper. The primary goal of a MSc thesis is to teach you important research skills: come up with a general idea of what to do, researching literature, coming up with a specific question that you want to address, performing research (computations, fieldwork, lab experiments), and finally writing it down in a thesis. If you successfully complete this cycle, I think your MSc thesis is a success. If the thesis, after some editing, is original enough to end up as a journal paper this is a big bonus.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: ***This is largely depends on your supervisor expectations.***
Some professors have certain requirements for their MSc students to graduate (i.e. publishing one paper) others do not have contribution requirements and knowing the literature is enough to them.
Even if you do have publishable work, some professors will keep pushing you and you will end up with three years MSc thesis similar in away or another to a PhD thesis.
In general, you are required to *know* the current literature of your subfield/problem area *very well* and summarize it in a thesis. It is definitely better to implement/compare different techniques, trying to identify challenges and trying to tackle one of the challenges.
*For example, your general area is cloud computing, your thesis topic is about materialized views or query processing under cloud computing infrastructure. This requires finding the current literature of query processing, how it is different under cloud computing settings and what are the main research challenges*
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: MSc thesis requirements vary. It is best to ask your course director.
I know some students in the UK getting distinctions for literature reviews, while other departments only give a distinction if the work is publishable or potentially publishable.
I was in fact at an UK university where MSc dissertations quite regularly gets published either during or a little after the course.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As someone who supervises MS and PhD students, your question makes me very nervous. Why are you now, at this point in your career, trying to sneak by accomplishing as little as possible? You are at the age and time when you should be envisioning great things and trying to create new knowledge (or at least add to it). I always tell my students that the aim of the MS is to generate something publishable (conference or journal paper). The reality is that not all achieve this (and I still let them graduate) but this is what you should aim for. It is for your advisor to know the field, but you need to ask him/her the question: where is this topic publishable? When can we take it to a conference (or to a journal)? If the advisor can't see how your work could be publishable (if it works out as you plan), then find another topic or find another advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The requirements probably change depending on where you are, but, having just finished my MSc in the UK, I can tell you what I was told supervisors are looking for in a Master's dissertation.
Some of the requirements I had have already been listed by username_2. Basically, demonstrate you know your chosen topic very well, identify some challenges, perhaps try to tackle one.
But the main thing that supervisors here are looking for is that you have gone beyond the material in the course. They want to see that you took what you learnt throughout the taught part of the masters program and applied it to something that wasn't covered, or in a way that wasn't discussed. Alternatively, you could also choose a topic that wasn't covered at all in your course and provide an overview of it, discussing challenges, open questions, important examples (which is where dissertations that are basically just literature reviews come in, as mentioned by username_3).
Good luck with your thesis! Unfortunately I don't know much about cloud computing, but I hope this helps anyway!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/09 | 683 | 2,912 | <issue_start>username_0: No starting point for scientific collaboration is better than face-to-face conversation. Conferences are good places to meet potential collaborator, but another way is to invite them to visit your institute/group and negotiate for possible collaborations.
However, when inviting a colleague from long distance (e.g. crossing the Atlantic), it is difficult to cover the cost of the flight (particularly as it significantly varies and hard to justify its necessity). Sometimes, the visitors has better access to available fund to cover his/her trip. Of course, it is easier to cover the cost of accommodation.
How do you invite a potential collaborator to visit your institute when you cannot cover his/her flight cost? Isn't it rude to invite someone and quote you must come on your own expenses as we cannot cover it? Note that the relationship is quite formal with least personal acquaintance (no joint work yet).<issue_comment>username_1: With apologies, and a firm understanding that lack of funding may be a dealbreaker.
It would certainly help if you can cover part of the expenses: "If you are ever in [Country X], I hope you will also visit [my institution] and we would be happy to pay for your hotel [or else do you have a couch?] and pay for around [small number] towards your travel expenses. You are of course very welcome to make a special trip but I regret that funding is tight and we would be unable to pay your international travel expenses."
... or something like that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Some schools do offer certain amount of money to help in invited speakers' expenses.
2. If you do not have any sufficient fund to cover this, you can ask your
colleagues (i.e. other faculty members) to help you out. Note that if they won't benefit from the speaker then most likely they will not participate in this.
3. Meet him/her in a conference; this seems to be a very realistic option. Actually, I think it is a better idea to meet him/her in the conference even if you are able to cover the expenses. Meet over cup of coffee and discuss the potential contribution and if needed settle another appointment at the hotel lobby.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: **Try to arrange their visit close to a conference in your field that is held on your continent** (domestic or intra-European flights are cheap, so you can probably cover that). Either have the visit just before or just after a big conference which the visitor will attend anyway means easier funding *and* easier scheduling for them (most people can only schedule so many around-the-world business trips per year). I have used that “trick” a lot, both when inviting people and when visiting other groups.
Also, look for binational grant programs that may be awarded for such purposes, there are some (but it obviously depends on the countries involved).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/09 | 1,379 | 5,700 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student in physics and every other month or so I get an e-mail from someone who wants a grad school or even postdoc position. These e-mails often start out "Dear Professor (*my name*)," (I'm not a professor) and go on to explain that they are a motivated student looking to do a PhD with me, sometimes referring to a position that I am supposed to have advertised (I didn't). In the past I have often sent a reply in which I try to be disinterested but helpful, pointing them to the jobs section on our website which explains clearly who to contact.
I'm asking because today I got another one:
>
> I would be pleased to join for the PhD Studentship position into your institution for (*field that has nothing to do with my institution*) research.
>
>
>
Oddly specific and inaccurate at the same time. I don't mind just deleting it. However, I'd like to help if I can.
* Why do people do this? To me, it seems counterproductive.
* How can I help them onto the right track?<issue_comment>username_1: What you describe is a form of academic spam. As any spam, people do it because:
1. the cost appears low
2. you can do it in bulk
3. the success rate is indeed horribly low, but if the number of emails sent is large, the product of (success rate) x (number of emails) can be non-negligible.
While the above analysis is probably true if you're selling sildenafil citrate, I think it does not hold in academia, because hiring decisions are typically a well-controlled process, and not an “on the spot” decision by a single person in power.
My policy regarding such emails is: my time is precious (in fact, it is most probably the main limiting factor in my scientific productivity). So, if there is at least one blatantly untrue or gross discrepancy in the email I receive, I do not reply. (That can include: getting my affiliation wrong, getting the research field wrong, referring to a position I didn't advertise, etc.)
---
*Added for clarification:* getting the title wrong does not, in my own system of value, consider a “blatant error”. Obviously, emailing a graduate student with “professor X” is weird, but you have to consider that honorifics, titles, etc. depend on country/research system. Thus, many people use “professor” when they refer to permanent staff, when they are not sure if the actual title is “Dr.” or “prof.” or whatever… It is, in my view, a really minor issue.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I see a fair number of these letters as well. Some see more genuine than others but as you state some do not even hit the main subject in which my department work. I see these as desperate attempts to get a foothold somewhere. In some cases, and I must emphasize that I cannot support his with hard proof, it seems having some form of official documentation may provide enough basis for persons to get the necessary background for visas and hence possibility to travel.
I am sure there are all kinds of reasons for these mails ranging from the perfectly honest, however misdirected, to the pure opportunist with alternative motives. The true tragedy is that the genuine contacts may become rejected because of the sheer number of mails.
I would recommend that each department/graduate school set up some form of standard reply, perhaps pointing at a web page stating how to apply. In our case PhD positions are offically advertised so contacting the department (me) is of no use.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I think we all get these emails and being famous and more senior probably means getting more of them. I am not famous or senior so I get one/two of these a day. **I reply to them all. I am not sending man to mars and and can spend 30 seconds to reply to someone who sent an irrelevant one or spend a bit of time helping someone who was genuine and/or had a high calibre and went and studied my work. Naturally the quality of my reply depends on the quality of the email I have received.** Thats the least that I can do. I must confess at times it has been a one liner saying "at least do a bit of research and see what I do instead if this generic meaningless email and have attached my boilerplate text explaining why this is not helpful and what they should do" but also sending a three pager, correcting mistakes I have seen in CV, cover letter and/or proposal and calling people I know to help somebody out.
Why do I do this? Yes it takes time and we are all busy but I enjoy the fact that I am in a position to guide someone and help them out in bettering themselves. **Many have done this for me before and believe it or not those guys who replied were really helpful**. I do the same in hope that it might inspire someone, help him/her succeed and give them the sense that people do care about you and want to have your back. Same way many people are in this community who give their time and help strangers they don't know.
**Now answer to the question:**
Write a boilerplate text for the ones who send you random stuff. This is not the last time you will get something like this. Explain why this is not going to help and what is the correct way. You only have to do this once and whether they take your advice or not is their choice...
In future if you become an academic please do try to help people and don't see their efforts as SPAM if you feel they are genuine and have tried. Also give the benefit of the doubt to the ones who send random emails. They might just be desperate and need some help. Preparing some text to explain the above might actually help someone. It might be that he/she has got bad advice about how to go about finding positions etc.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2013/03/09 | 854 | 3,539 | <issue_start>username_0: I have studied Physics (Diploma) and since 3 years I work as a Software Engineer.
But I am starting to miss the high degree of intellectual challenge. So I am thinking to go back to academia. Unfortunately my Diploma grade was B (German 2), likewise the grade of my in-depth elective Theoretical Particle Physics. I think I could have done better, but my mother died of cancer during my Diploma thesis and this didn't leave much focus and time for me. Plus I started working on a Web App in the last 2 months of my studies. Other grades were better, my Math elective (Functional Analysis) was A+, likewise Theoretical Physics. My undergraduate studies' grades were mixed, between A+ and B-.
My thesis also does not look so well. Because of a lack of time it has orthographic errors, discussion of results is too short and the source code snippets in it look ugly. Once I applied for a job through a head hunter and after they saw my thesis they completely lost interest in me as a candidate.
So question: how hard is it in such a situation to apply for a PhD Programme and is it a good idea at all? What would be a good strategy when applying? I am interested in Mathematics, Theoretical Physics, Mathematical Physics or Computer Science.<issue_comment>username_1: In Germany even some renowned research institutes mention in the job offers that people with at least grade B should be encouraged to apply for a position. So I don't see here a major problem for you. No one looks on your pre-diploma grades, this is now different with the bachelor AND master degree. But you have to make a presentation of your diploma work for the job interview. I don't know what speaks against adding results that you worked out after that thesis to make the work more impressive, as you didn't have as much time as other students with a scholarship or rich parents and were forced to work besides your diploma work, especially as the diploma needs 12 months in germany. If they want you to send them your diplom pdf, than of course you have to look for another group.
The major problem I see is that you wrote your thesis now 3 years ago, and 2-2.5 years is also a deadline I saw several times in such german PhD job offers, as after some time you simply loose knowledge.
Nonetheless you should try it, write a few dozen applications and look how much invitations for a job interview you get and in what fields, but be clear what your motivation is. Your question does sound to me like you a bored and desperated in your current job, that is not the best reason for a Prof. to hire you, you should show interest in a specific topic, related to your diploma work would make your motivation to do a PhD more credible to me.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you're serious about getting into a grad school, then you need to take the initiative. In your situation, just sending off applications is unlikely to be enough. What you need to do is to get someone on the inside of an institution to want to work with you. So -- contact individual professors and let them know that you are interested in working with them. This means you need to figure out who they are, what they work on, and, when you contact them, you need to make it about why you can be of help in their research area. It's a lot of work, but the process will probably be good for you as well, narrowing down what it is you really are interested in, what your abilities are, and what kind of work you want to do. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2013/03/10 | 652 | 2,713 | <issue_start>username_0: I have just learned of the 'PhD by published works' which appears to be a fairly common program for schools in the UK. Is this similar to an honoris causa conferral or is it some separate program?
After reviewing materials on the Oxford Brooks & Warwick sites it appears that the entire program is just preparing a defense, which sounds a bit like Habilitation at first pass but it also seems that these programs are not restricted to current PhD holders.
Can anyone shed a little light on this for me?
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: A doctorate "honoris causa" is awarded by universities to recognize a person's outstanding contribution to science, or sometimes also society. It is a honorary degree (so you cannot apply for it), and not very common. Usually the people who receive such a degree already have a doctorate.
The Dr. habil. is a degree that only exists in some countries, such as Germany, Austria, France and Russia. Basically it gives you the right to teach courses at a university. You can only get it after getting a PhD, and usually requires writing another thesis and giving one or two lectures on topics in your field.
I do not know what a "PhD by published works" is, but it sounds to me like a PhD program where the thesis basically is a collection of published (presumably peer-reviewed) articles by the student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While it may be common for universities in the UK to *offer* such a degree, I'm not sure it's at all common to obtain a PhD in this way (i.e. 'by published works'). I think it is mainly aimed at people who have been involved in research for some time (especially as university staff members) without a PhD, but who have published material equivalent to a PhD thesis. (As you will have read, for the Warwick program one must be either a member of staff at Warwick or have graduated with a Bachelor's degree or equivalent at least seven years ago.)
Generally someone applying for such a program would have already published the works they are planning to submit, and therefore as you say the program will consist primarily of preparing for the oral examination (often called 'viva' in the UK). Although you probably have to prepare some kind of extra document as well (in the Oxford Brookes program this is a 'critical appraisal' of the works being presented).
This is, as Pieter has already explained, very different from either a habilitation (which is at a higher level than PhD) or an honorary PhD (which in general can honour any kind of accomplishment and doesn't require the holder to have done research at PhD level or indeed to have a university education at all).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/03/10 | 901 | 3,847 | <issue_start>username_0: Possible benefits: More grant money through other departments
Possible drawbacks: A significant fraction of their research might not be seen as research that benefits the department's standing in the area.
But what about others?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think either of the points mentioned above are relevant. If there's the potential for more grant money there should be evidence of it by tenure time. As for "benefit to the department" the real question is how good the work is, and if it's recognized in the larger communities.
From the tenure-seeker's perspective, one potential benefit is a much larger pool of letter writers. A downside is the "jack of all trades" problem, where each community can only comment on a portion of the work, and the work itself is not perceived as excellent in any individual community.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you've been doing interdisciplinary research for five years, and now approach the tenure process without a clear idea of how to sell your case, consider it failed, and start looking for a job elsewhere, before you are under an immense pressure of finding a good job in a one-year grace period after the end of the world as you know it.
If you were hired specifically for interdisciplinary research, and your offer letter stated that, and your time was split "50% + 1 hour in computer science + 25% in department of Roman languages + 25% in agriculture", with a clear explanation as to how you are to be evaluated by each of the parties involved, then these explanations should have served as the guidelines to build your research program. If you were hired to do the theory of parallel computing, but later decided that it would be cool to do some extra work in Roman languages because you liked their research questions, and thought you could contribute with your data mining algorithms that would uncover nuances of how Latin and French are interconnected (and you did, by their standards); and you proposed some GIS tools for horticulturalists to use that have become the industry standard software -- that's all fun and fine, but if you did not discuss that with your CS chair, this was likely a waste of time, as in terms of parallel computing, this time was as good as playing squash. Your annual reviews in the main department should have indicated so, if your department would ever care to guide you (not all departments do, though).
Spending time in another discipline is very fruitful for finding interesting research problems (as typically most disciplines don't talk to one another, and there's a wealth of problems to be solved using other disciplines' tools), but it also means that you have had less time to spend in your home discipline, which nearly inevitably means a weaker CV: fewer grants, fewer publications, lower quality research. (That's essentially [username_1's last point](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/8513/739)).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Interdisciplinarity can help or hurt, depending on how your work is perceived by the experts in each of the two (or more) fields. If you are seen by the experts in field A as doing excellent work in A, and if you're also seen by the experts in field B as doing excellent work in B, then this situation improves your chances for tenure. If, on the other hand, the experts in field A say something like "not so great in A, but it's impressive that (s)he also does B," while the experts in field B say something like "not so great in B, but it's impressive that (s)he also does A," then you're in trouble --- the people evaluating you for tenure will see "not so great" and ignore "impressive". So, if you can do excellent work in both areas, do so, but if you can't, then it's better to do excellent work in one field than mediocre work in two.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/03/10 | 3,072 | 12,970 | <issue_start>username_0: Before deciding to do one's PhD under a certain professor, what questions should one ask of his/her former and current students?
Many students (including me) are not sure what exactly to ask. May be a community wiki here might be a general source for such students.
**Please recommend *phrasing* of the question(s) also.**
This is a related question, [How to evaluate potential advisers on grounds other than their research/publications?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/158/how-to-evaluate-potential-advisers-on-grounds-other-than-their-research-publicat?rq=1) but it is much broader. I'm looking for specific questions to be asked to the students. Also manner in which to ask :)
P.S. I have accepted an answer, but feel free to add more answers if you think they differ than the ones already given.<issue_comment>username_1: Disclaimer: I am not a student. I am the "potential advisor" (PA)
For current students:
* does PA have time to meet with you when you need help? Or does PA want too many meetings?
* how much guidance are you given? Too much? Too little?
* is the relationship "work only"? Do you talk about non technical academic issues?
For former students, the comment by Anonymous is dead-on.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the most important is:
* Are you happy with your PhD in general?
It covers a lot of issues, but usually you don't want to do a PhD in a place where students are unhappy and frustrated. The good thing is that if students feel really bad, they rarely hide it.
The next things are related to:
* General contacts on the line student-advisor (How much contact and support can you expect, both for research and administrative stuff?).
* Funding (Is it a problem or a non-issue, e.g. for attending a conference?).
* Research (What the actual research looks like? What is the toughest part, biggest emphasis on, the most time-consuming part, etc?)
* How much time does it *typically* take to finish PhD? Does it happen often that someone drops out?
Other questions will depend of things *you* consider important. You may expect a lot of autonomy, or a lot of guidance. You may expect a very ambitious programme, or a PhD-life balance. You may like to teach, or you may like to keep it at minimum. You may be eager to travel a lot, or prefer to stay mostly in one place. You may be more into a particular branch of science or methodology, or into another...
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Link to the urch.com forum discussing exactly these kinds of issues: [Questions to ask current graduate students](http://www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/63673-questions-ask-current-graduate-students-prospective-schools.html)
The problems people have differ greatly by field, e.g. the funding issue depends on whether students are supported by grants of their advisors (sciences and engineering) or by the university. Also whether the courses in the field are popular among undergrads (many teaching assistant positions available) or unpopular (the opposite). The questions you should ask should address the common problems in your field.
Edit: forgot the shameless self-promotion: I wrote about the [suggested questions for admitted graduate students](http://www.sanderheinsalu.com/ajaveeb/?p=142 "Suggested questions for admitted graduate students") once in my blog.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A couple of variations on Anonymous's fabulous comment:
* "What do you want to do when you finish?"
* "How is your advisor/department helping you prepare for your eventual job search?" — Be wary of confused blank stares, even from the younger students.
* "Where did your advisor's former students go after they finished their PhDs? Where do they work now?" — Be wary of "I don't know." Compare with the answers to the first question and with your own career goals (even if they're not well-formed).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: #1 question (for former students): How long did it take for you to graduate?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Is your advisor planning on going on sabbatical any time soon?
My horrible advisor did this during my second year (he spent the year in Ireland instead of the US) and it did not help my efforts at all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Every professor is unique, every student is a bit different. The most important thing in a grad student/prof relationship is that you can work effectively together. If the professor can work well with his current students, then he can probably work well with new students. So what you want to find out is: does the professor give the students the environment they need to flourish? Do the current students work together extensively, or do they compete with each other? (For example, do students collaborate on papers or does everything funnel through the prof)? Are the current students excited about their research projects? (You can figure this out by asking them to describe what they do).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: 1. Do/Did you (the current/former PhD) enjoy working in this supervisor's research group? Do research group members work with each other collaboratively and help each other? And ask the PhD student to elaborate.
This question tries to get at what the research group dynamic is. This is fairly important in my opinion - the last thing you want to concern yourself with is politics in the research group. I have seen PhD friends frustrated by this.
Ideally you should ask this question in a less formal setting (some grad school visits will have time for social events). And sometimes you meet grad students who are comfortable sharing their experience openly. If you are not comfortable asking this question, as it can be an awkward question for the supervisor's current PhD, you can simply observe the interaction between group members, and between group members and the supervisor.
2. Is the supervisor generally available? Does it take a long time to arrange a meeting to meet with the supervisor (used to be the case with my supervisor because he was so busy)? Does the supervisor respond immediately and effectively (another friend's supervisor tend to leave questions to last minute)?
3. Are group members expected to work 24/7 or 9-to-5? Some supervisors expect you to reply to emails immediately, and some work strictly business hours.
4. Does the supervisor take a hands-on or hands-off approach? Are students expected to be really independent with lots of freedom, or are they guided/directed along the way with less freedom?
5. Does the supervisor support his/her students to consider career paths outside of academia? Some supervisors only want their students to go into academia, and it will be harder to discuss options with such supervisors.
For Q2-Q5, the right answer will depend on your own preference - what you want is a supervisor whom you will work well with.
And, I know you ask specifically about questions, but make sure you watch their body language and see if the lab members seems comfortable with the supervisor or not. This says a lot about the supervision style.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: I'm a supervisor not student these days. I had things go rather wrong as a student, quit my project and moved to a new team and restarted everything. I knew about my proposed supervisor's field reputation (excellent - I still think this even after things went wrong) - I knew nothing about what they were like as a supervisor (they sucked).
This also should be more a conversation over coffee - you don't want them to feel like they are being grilled or are under evaluation from you. Remember, if you accept an offer they could be your colleagues so you are selling yourself to them too. Keep things positive on your end.
*How would you describe their supervision style?* Different styles suit different students, know about yourself as best you can. I know of advisors that have contracts and forms that students fill in after each meeting summarising their understanding of the key points and next steps that advisor then responds to and they both sign -> student speaking of this loved it, I would have run screaming.
*How would you describe the group dynamics?*
You usually aren't just working with the supervisor but the group. Even if your project does not involve the group - these are your colleagues. How do they tend to function? Is it everyone on their own? Collaborative? Collegiate but not collaborative?
*Did you have much / a lot of freedom to direct your own project?*
*What sort of involvement have you had in funding proposals (grants / commercial etc.)*
This can be good and bad - too much involvement and you are taken away from your core business. But some involvement can really help develop skills useful for industry and academia, and can help land that next position.
*Does your supervisor include you in opportunities*. Will their "big name" actually get you anything? Remember "big names" are often super busy, so there needs to be a trade off (big names do help just by reputation, but it isn't everything).
*How involved are you in the larger group / School / Institute / University?*. Just useful to know how they tend to work, and again knowing what sort of person you like to be. If you just want to focus on your project and nothing else, being expected to engage widely will feel like a drain. For others it is great career development opportunities (and helps them stay sane while studying).
*What are your career goals - how well have they been supported through your studies? Have they changed through your project*
Helpful to understand their perspective. Also good to know if the supervisor is super helpful if you want to become a copy of them, and not helpful if you have different goals.
*What's a typical work week look like for students (hours, office vs lab vs field, wfh vs in office, group meetings, paid work etc.)*
This is important information about work style and allows you to evaluate whether you will have a nice work environment (based on what you value) and good work-life balance (based on what you value). If your supervisor says I expect people to work 9-5M-F (or set your own hours), but the typical is 8-8M-Su then that's really important information. Even if your supervisor is happy with you doing a "standard" day, will you feel comfortable keeping that balance when everyone else isn't? How much "other" stuff are students typically doing and how will that affect your plans?
*With paid work (teaching, tutoring, research assistant stuff that is not on your thesis) - how well does the number of hours you are contracted to do match to what you are expected / end up doing?*
If you pick up 10 hours teaching a week will you typically spend 8 hours on it? or 20? Important to be able to make an informed decision about what you want and can afford. You might earn double what you'd get at Maccas so might be fine that 10 on paper = 20 in practice cause you still earn as much and are happy with the work, or you might resent what really is wage theft and an illegal, dishonest and exploitative practice.
*What's the administration of your studies like eg reports, presentations, hurdles etc.*. No external oversight is a problem - you do need some outside your supervisor review that your project is at an appropriate standard, is practical and realistic with resources (including time), and you aren't being hung out to dry. You need some way to raise issues and have people whose job it is to deal with them if they happen (and they are not uncommon - even with good supervisors). But, too much administration and it becomes a burden. Understanding what is required is just nice additional information. It probably won't be the same for you - universities love to change up their admin frequently in my experience.
Question about the project and funding others have proposed are also really important, I've focussed on the "other" stuff that often gets missed.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: A lot of important criteria have been mentioned here. There is, however, one integral criterion which, in my opinion, covers everything: the careers of this professor's former disciples. Using internet, you can easily gleen this info.
My long-term friend is a professor at a university, which is regarded very good but not fancy (not in the Ivy League, or alike). However, young people are trying hard to join his group -- and some choose it over Ivy League offers. Aside from him being a brilliant scholar and a devoted teacher, an important reason for his popularity is that (a) all his postdocs become professors; (b) all his grads get postdoctoral fellowships (not just regular postdoctoral jobs, but fellowships) -- and eventually they also get permanent academic positions (usually, faculty at good schools). The people in the community know this, and regard it as a great luck to work with him.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/03/10 | 1,228 | 5,302 | <issue_start>username_0: My paper was rejected from a journal. However, remarks of one of the reviewers were useful, and I incorporated them into the next version of the paper.
Is there a general pattern of acknowledging such contribution (in the Acknowledgement section)?
Or should I leave it, not to advertise information that the paper was rejected from a particular journal?
(As a side note, this paper was rejected two times, each time with one positive review, and one of type "OK, but I think it is not of general interest".)
EDIT:
In my case (as in general in my field) reviewers were anonymous. (Otherwise I would just use their names.)
And in my case the helpful comments were in positive reviews (but I doubt whether it changes anything).<issue_comment>username_1: First, I think it is good to acknowledge reviewers as you consider doing. It is the editor who rejects any papers based on the results of reviews so the reviews may still be very constructive and indeed helpful in improving a paper. So I would suggest something like the following
>
> We/I (gratefully) acknowledge the (critical) review by X on an earlier
> version of the manuscript.
>
>
>
There are many ways to express it and what words you wish to use is up to you and the way you wish to express your gratitude. I would not add the name of the journal(s) where the reviews were conducted (other than in the letter to the journal editor accompanying your MS submission).
I also would like to take the opportunity to add that the following issue, not that it applies to your case but more to point out some bad practices for the community. The poor behavior concerns when someone acknowledges a famous persons review just to gain leverage in resubmitting it to another journal. I have seen how persons have used reviews stating that the paper should be rejected because it is "crap" as a "most valuable input to help improve the manuscript". Since no-one typically knows what this review did, the gut reaction is to think it must have been valuable since the reviewer is well known. For this reason it is good to provide the review/revisions from the old MS when re-submitting it so that the review-revision work becomes obvious to the editor.
As a final point, I would not add the acknowledgement of any reviewers new or old until the time when your MS has been (hopefully) accepted in the new journal.
EDIT: Based on the good comments by username_2 on anonymous reviewers and how to distinguish reviews from old and new MS I would write something as the following
>
> We/I (gratefully) acknowledge the (critical) review by two anonymous reviewers as well as the (critical) review by another anonymous reviewer on an earlier
> version of the manuscript.
>
>
>
Words in parenthesis are optional and can be exchanged for others that better suit your needs.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Piotr has asked that I add one of my comments as an answer. Please note that I am a fairly inexperienced academic, so don't take anything I say too seriously!
Firstly, I'll reiterate one of my comments on username_1's answer:
You really really should not mention journal names or the fact that the paper was previously rejected. The journal you are publishing in would not appreciate it! (It makes it clear they were only your second, or in this case third, choice.)
Since you say that the helpful remarks of the earlier reviewer were about grammar, typos and a few small changes throughout the document rather than something that substantially changed the exposition of your paper, I think that conveying your thanks directly to the reviewer via the journal's editor (which you say you have already done) is probably a more appropriate acknowledgment, especially given the difficulty of making it clear you are thanking a reviewer from a different journal while not mentioning any names or the fact that the paper was rejected.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I use the phrase "I thank an anonymous colleague for [providing an important idea]."
This implies that the idea came from someone else, but it doesn't explicitly mention that the paper was previously rejected or reviewed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I have been waiting for a chance to pull a prank like
>
> I would like to thank 15 anonymous referees from 5 journals to which this paper was submitted for their helpful comments.
>
>
>
but, as many people said, few journals will appreciate this sort of remark. It is true that this is what happens with most papers, so if we are to be honest and transparent, we should just state this sort of history. And it happens to the top researchers, too, although some people, judging by their productivity of 10+ papers a year, never get even requests for revisions.
May be a weaker form would be
>
> I would like to thank the three anonymous referees and the associate editor of [THIS JOURNAL], as well as several other anonymous reviewers, for their helpful comments.
>
>
>
Sometimes, it happens that the most important revision was actually a couple of journals ago which really improved the paper, but that journal still did not accept the paper, so it cruised through another editorial board or two with just minor language remarks.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/03/11 | 1,406 | 5,519 | <issue_start>username_0: I had an amazing time at my REU (Research Experiences for Undergraduates) last summer. I would really love to do another one this year.
Problem is, I am about to graduate, so I will technically not be an undergraduate this summer. I do intend to continue my education in graduate school in the Fall, and have been admitted somewhere.
I've been told that I should just kick back and relax this summer so that I'm fully unwound for grad school, but I don't have any money to travel, all my friends will have left for their grad school already, and there's really nothing that would stress me out more than sitting around and doing nothing for three months. I love to travel, make new friends, and learn cool stuff, so I think doing another REU would actually be the perfect way for me to unwind.
At my last REU, we had a student who had graduated that year and was about to go into a Master's program. It was rumored that she had omitted/lied about this on her application and the admissions people just didn't look into it carefully. I don't know if this is true, though. It seems possible that the program staff simply felt her application was strong enough to warrant making an exception - after all, she wasn't *going* to grad school yet.
>
> Is it possible to be admitted to a mathematics REU the summer between undergrad and graduate school?
>
>
>
If not, would offering to go without pay (for only room and board) make any difference? What about REUs in physics, or compsci, or other sciences which might want somebody with a math background?<issue_comment>username_1: I quote from the [NSF REU guideline](http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13542/nsf13542.htm) (emphasis mine):
>
> *Eligible Student Participants*: Undergraduate student participants
> supported with NSF funds in either REU Supplements or REU Sites must
> be U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, or permanent residents of the United
> States. An undergraduate student is a student who is enrolled in a
> degree program (part-time or full-time) leading to a baccalaureate or
> associate degree. Students who are transferring from one college or
> university to another and are enrolled at neither institution during
> the intervening summer may participate. High school graduates who have
> been accepted at an undergraduate institution but who have not yet
> started their undergraduate study are also eligible to participate.
> **Students who have received their bachelor's degrees and are no longer
> enrolled as undergraduates are generally not eligible to participate.**
> For REU Sites, a significant fraction of the student participants
> should come from outside the host institution or organization. Some
> NSF directorates encourage inclusion in the REU program of K-12
> teachers of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Please
> contact the appropriate disciplinary program officer for guidance.
> Within the framework of the basic eligibility guidelines outlined
> here, most REU Sites and Supplements further define recruitment and
> selection criteria, based on the nature of the particular research and
> other factors.
>
>
>
So this means that (a) your host will not be able to receive funding for you from the NSF if s/he accepts you into the program (b) on the other hand if you and/or the PI of the grant is able to secure funding otherwise, there's generally no rule saying that a student in your position cannot be involved in research in some way.
You will need to individually contact the REUs you are interested to find out whether they'd be willing to grant you the leeway.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: REUs are almost all a specific NSF program which, as Willie points out, generally doesn't allow students in your situation.
However the programs called "summer schools" (not to be confused with credit bearing courses offered by universities in the summer) often do allow graduate students (and some have graduate students as their main target).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There do exist programs for this period of time (between undergraduate and graduate programs). The ones that comes to mind are [EDGE](http://www.edgeforwomen.org/) (which you can see on their webpage is limited to women) and the [PCMI summer school](http://pcmi.ias.edu/program-ugss/2013). I believe there are others, as username_2 points out one should google 'summer school' instead of 'REU' to get at them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You could consider doing an internship (for statistics openings, see <http://www.amstat.org/education/internships.cfm>), although doing this mid-March is jumping on a train that had left the station, judging by the deadlines. You also need to have something more applied in your resume than pure math to be of interest to industry folks, too.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Not all REUs allow graduating undergraduates, but some do. I know for a fact that the [RIPS](http://www.ipam.ucla.edu/programs/student-research-programs/) programs (both the ones in UCLA and Hong Kong) do. I personally did the REU in Hong Kong after my senior year and it was an amazing experience.
Note that this is an exception since the REU funding isn't directly REU funding but through the math institute IPAM, so maybe there are similar practices at other math institutes such as the REU in Minnesota run by IMA, though I am not certain because I do not have personal experience with the others.
Upvotes: 0 |
Subsets and Splits