date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2013/04/25 | 962 | 4,136 | <issue_start>username_0: I asked a potential advisor for possible research projects but I haven't received a reply.
What is the appropriate thing to do?
* Reply with my previous mail quoted, and say something like I having heard from you... and try to arrange a personal meeting to discuss the topic.
* Or simply forward my previous email hoping that somehow my email wasn't read the first time.<issue_comment>username_1: First things first: whenever you write again or otherwise contact your potential advisor, stay polite and respectful. Conduct yourself in the most professional manner you can. **While you might feel your correspondent is acting unprofessionally in not responding at a rate that pleases you, asking again in anything that looks like a demanding tone is not going to reflect well on you.**
There are many possible reasons why your correspondent hasn't replied to your first email yet, even 10 days down the line. You are probably already quite aware of the possibilities, but here are a few:
* He/she is simply busy. Is it a busy time of year? Is it examination time? Is he/she likely to busy marking/providing feedback. providing lectures?
* Is he/she on holiday? A quick check with the Department/School/Institute administration should answer this.
* There could be personal reasons. You don't want to appear a demanding person when the academic is making preparations for a family member's funeral - for example! Extreme sitation, yes, but not impossible.
With these possibilities in mind, you could write again to your potential advisor, reminding him/her that you are very keen to work together. **I do not advise simply re-sending your original email unless you have good reason to believe that the original didn't reach its target** - e.g. you have received a mailhost error relating to an undelivered message. I suspect this is not the case. In your follow-up email, **refer** to your previous email. Resending an email is similar to saying to someone "I SAID....!!!".
In your follow-up email, I would acknowledge that the academic might well be very busy and that you would gratefully appreciate any time the academic could spend talking with you about research opportunities. Offer alternatives - you've hinted at this - such as arranging a meeting or a telephone call at a time convenient for the academic.
**At this stage, be reasonably formal. Your spelling and grammar should be as good as you can make it. This indicates that you are taking this correspondence seriously, as should he/she.**
It is very easy to appear demanding, annoying or otherwise negative in an email, even if that is not your intention. **Turn up the politeness up a few notches**, even if you think it's starting to be sickly and ingratiating. In emails, it is extremely easy to appear demanding or accusatory. You don't have the advantage of being present in a conversation to send all those little non-verbal clues which make up the vast majority of human communication.
I think that it is appropriate to **mention that you have some expectations** when you'd like to have this interaction. You could mention that you are meeting with other advisers (if true) and that you'd like to be in a position to make a decision in one/two month's time. For this reason, you'd like to have a meeting sometime in the next 1-2 weeks, if possible.
Summary:
* You be unfailingly polite and professional,
* You put effort into your next email - don't just resend a previous one,
* You suggest as many alternatives for an interaction you can think of,
* You provide some kind of time-scale for action.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, it would be worthwhile to seek the advice of someone at your institution: the director of graduate studies, an older graduate student, anyone with more experience than you whose experience you trust.
Please keep in mind that institutional cultures and advisors' personalities vary widely, and also some professors are notorious for ignoring their e-mail. Someone who knows the advisor in question will be able to better guess what this "means".
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/04/25 | 1,251 | 5,316 | <issue_start>username_0: *As a follow-up to "[Whether to publish one big paper or many smaller papers for a given research project?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/9624/285)":*
Suppose one wants to generate a number of publications from a single research idea or project, because other things being equal, more publications is better. What is a reasonable way to do so; one that does not dilute or compromise the quality of ones papers?<issue_comment>username_1: If you have a specific research question/problem, and devised a technique, method, algorithm or system, to address it, then I think it makes more sense to showcase that method in a way that seems natural, in a single self-contained publication, to the extent that it is possible within space limits, rather than artificially breaking it up across multiple publications solely to increase the number of publications. This will, first, annoy readers, who don't care about your publication rate. It will likely also make editors/reviewers unhappy. Of course, if the method *naturally* breaks up into more than one paper, than that is fine.
To generate multiple publications around a single method, I think a good way to go would be to write additional papers that supplement and possibly enhance a single major publication. For example, suppose you were to devise a new technique to analyse some data set(s). Then additional publications could be, for example, an extension of that technique to analyze additional, different, data sets. Also, you could have a separate publication which just describes the details of the software implementation. This would not fit well into a (say) statistical research paper, but could be a perfectly viable publication on its own.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Of course it depends how narrow or wide you define what a "project" is.
I'm chemometrician working with vibrational spectra of biological samples.
So there are:
* Applications (e.g. a particular biological/medical question)
[We write papers about medical diagnostics](http://softclassval.r-forge.r-project.org/2011/2011-07-01-ABC-Glioma-paper.html) or biochemical characterization of samples or biochemical changes that occur with some disease, ...
Even within this "application" topic, there may be distinct subtopics. E.g. basic research about a disease is different from developing a diagnostic method.
* As chemometrician, I develop data analysis methods (often triggered by the application).
[We write methods/theory papers.](http://softclassval.r-forge.r-project.org/2013/2013-01-03-ChemomIntellLabSystTheorypaper.html)
* We also develop instrumentation to measure our samples.
[We write papers about that as well](http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00216-013-6726-3)
These separations are sensible to me:
A reader who wants to learn about a particular disease may not want to dive into chemometric theory development but instead wants to see biochemical findings. Another reader may be interested in the chemometric details but not in the particular disease. Readers looking into instrumentation details may not care about the disease or the particular statistical model applied to our data.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is one trend that I see around me, which is in some cases to **split a piece of work in two pieces: a high-impact letter, and follow-up full paper** with all the details.
There are many reasons why this might be a good idea. Increase in number of publication is one of them, but there are others:
* If you work in a rapidly developing and highly competitive field (i.e. you risk being scooped if you wait 3 more months to publish your idea), this allows you a fast publication of the idea and first results (proof of concept, if you will). Also, letters tend to be reviewed more rapidly, which also decreases publication time. Then, you will publish all the details, influence of method parameters, etc.
* If your work would be interesting to a wider community, it allows you to deliver two different messages (or at least, the same message at two different levels) to two communities. This increases the overall impact of your research.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This will probably vary from field to field, but I've seen instances of publishing different analyses in different papers. One rich data set can yield many different analyses which may be largely unconnected with each other.
By way of example, a single longitudinal study of depression may collect data on a number of fronts; information about the participants (gender, age, location, etc), their depressive episodes, family history, genomics, neuroimaging, etc. Each of these can result in a different set of analyses, many of which would be of interest to completely different fields. A neuroscientist interested in activity patterns in the brain would not necessarily be interested in a study examining instances of suicide in high-SES vs. low-SES populations.
By thinking carefully about study design *before* collecting data, you can position yourself to examine questions in many different fields, leading to numerous publications.
As a final point, I'll just briefly mention that cross-disciplinary collaboration is a wonderful thing, and is very relevant to this discussion.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/04/25 | 764 | 2,853 | <issue_start>username_0: How does the scientific output of PhD’s who work in industry compare to that of PhD’s who stayed in academia (professors, mainly). I mean, in terms of number of publications, conferences, etc.<issue_comment>username_1: *Disclaimer: this answer applies to computer science. I suspect things are dramatically different in the natural sciences*.
It's hard to measure these things, and a bit unfair. If you work as a professor, publications are the base unit (along with funding) for measuring your performance as a researcher. You also are encouraged to grow research groups that in turn will produce more and more papers.
If you work in industry (even industrial research labs) (and I've done both), you are evaluated not just in terms of paper output, but in terms of internal metrics relating to how you help the company.
So the incentive structure in industry is different.
Bottom line, since I haven't really answered the question: I expect that the average number of publications/researcher will be slightly less in industry than in academia, but the average will get closer as the lab characteristics become more "university-like": think MSR vs (say) Walmart Labs.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I voted username_1's answer up because its holistically very good and just wanted to add that in the field of scientometrics (a field I am somewhat familiar with and still getting familiar with), there has been some past work done on this general topic including academia-industry productivity and collaborations.
Reading some of these literature might be useful for you if you are looking at quantitative evaluations of such productivity and impact. Mind you though that quantitative evaluations do not always yield the complete or "true" story behind things. Regardless, [this](http://www.akademiai.com/content/p685537285403341/), [this](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733399000554), [this](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497207000697), [this](http://www.akademiai.com/content/y7525125557242k7/) and [this](http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/B%3aSCIE.0000041651.26664.14#page-1) might be useful for you.
**Note:** This is only a small sub sample of such scientometric research and is not meant to be comprehensive or representative.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The ability of industry and other non-academic personnel to publish and present papers can often be restricted by intellectual property concerns, security restrictions, and other concerns. Therefore, even though the amount of high-quality scientific research being performed in non-academic settings may be comparable, the "measurable" amount—as seen in conferences, papers, and other "recorded" means—will often be somewhat lower than an academic group of comparable size.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/04/25 | 2,384 | 10,216 | <issue_start>username_0: I have recently been told by the professor of a particular course of mine, that our final grades will be withheld (given as an "Incomplete" which is later replaced by the final grade) until we individually submit our semester papers in the course to a conference.
This has a few issues to go with it:
* I defended my MSc and passed, however without this credit I will not receive my degree this semester.
* I do not want a low-quality publication on my record, especially since it appears past students in the course published in pay-to-publish conferences.
* I am far, far from an expert in this field. I took the course to learn about the subject and have only been spending the last few weeks on this research paper. To give more context, I don't even have a publication in my PhD work yet and I am 2 years in.
The situation prompts two questions from me:
1. Is it *ethical* for the professor to **require** a student to submit a paper to a conference for a course? (This requirement is not mentioned in the syllabus.)
2. Is it *allowed* for a professor to require this? Are there any rules or regulations in the US (state school) to prevent it?<issue_comment>username_1: Your question is missing the following info. Obviously, you have approached the professor and talked to him about the specific issue you are facing: your paper is ready, you *could* submit it to a conference, but what you really want is to be able to get your degree this semester. There is no reasonable expectation that, if all the work is done, you should just postpone your degree waiting for an upcoming conference.
So, the missing information is: what did he answer about your specific issue?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's a little odd to require something that is not mentioned in the syllabus. I understand that things can change in the course of a semester. But this is a rather draconian requirement and as such should have been specified up front in the syllabus.
If (as appears to be the case) the professor is willing to "soften" the requirement, then this entire question might be viewed as an overreaction.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This is highly suspect behavior—particularly when it is not published in the *original* course syllabus, or written down anywhere.
In general, however, this requirement seems highly impractical—most conferences operate on a schedule far longer than a typical semester. Therefore, it would seem that almost every student's grade would be held up waiting for the work to be accepted.
While I can understand (perhaps) the logic behind such a move, I don't agree with this. A scientific conference presentation is a serious undertaking, and should be an *option*, not a requirement!
However, whether it is allowed will depend upon your university's regulations. You should check first within the department, and escalate only if necessary.
(However, under such circumstances, if there are no proceedings published, and no formal record, I would be entirely comfortable leaving such a presentation off of my CV.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I am a professor at a state school in the US, and American professors are currently the targets of a lot of undeserved grief (e.g. it is currently fashionable to believe that we are "lazy" and work much less than a full "business week"; that is not only a mistake but likely a dishonest, politically motivated mistake). So keep that preamble in mind when I say:
>
> This is one of the most unambiguously unacceptable behaviors from a course instructor that I have heard.
>
>
>
Let me try to count the ways (but there are so many that I may get tired before I finish):
1) One of the most basic understandings between the student, the instructor and the university is the duration of the course. By a certain extremely public, agreed upon, well-publicized deadline, all of the coursework must be complete, and by a slightly later date that your instructor has been carefully informed of, the course grades are due. Planning to defer submission of the course grade after this date is just not the way the American academic system works.
2) Giving a grade of "incomplete" is not withholding a grade: it is assigning a certain kind of unsatisfactory grade. [Once in college a rather elderly professor literally did not submit any of the grades for the course I was taking. It was a little strange -- in these days we actually received transcripts in the mail over the break so the inquiry was less immediate than it would now be -- but he apologized and submitted the grades very soon after the start of the next quarter. *That's* withholding a grade.] In order to assign an incomplete, the student must not have completed the official coursework.
3) The instructor is not suitably respectful of the obvious problem which can occur if you assign students' grades too late: you may prevent them from graduating. Many American universities have policies to *expedite* final coursework and grading for (would-be) graduating students. Moreover, in the universities I've been involved with, beyond the written rules there is an unwritten culture that as an instructor you should think twice about any course practice that interferes with a student's timely graduation. (Sometimes it turns out the student *fails* your course and therefore does not graduate on time. That's "okay", but most of instructors would indeed think more carefully about assigning a failing grade under these circumstances and feel honorbound to convey the failing grade to the student sooner rather than later. What if their parents show up in town only to learn that the student did not actually graduate?) This practice is not hard to understand: one of very few commonalities among American academics is that we were all students at one time, so we should have some sympathies for the student perspective.
4) This course requirement is unusual and potentially problematic, and it is not listed on the course syllabus. I think that the whole point of the course syllabus is so that instructors cannot totally change their course requirements / grading schemes in the middle of the course, and that seems to be what is happening here.
5) Teaching a university course is not like playing a game of Truth-or-Dare: it does not give you authority to compel the student outside of the classroom and the dorm room / study carrel. Submitting a paper to a conference is a real-world action with real-world ramifications (the OP is rightly aware and concerned about this). It is creating work -- possibly rather pointless and frivolous work -- for other busy academics and/or professionals. It is setting a student up for harsh critique even up to the point of ridicule. It is also bullying a student into publishing something they didn't actually want to publish.
Okay, I got tired. What should a student do in this situation?
>
> Talk to the faculty member in question.
>
>
>
This is an in-person conversation. You should think carefully both about want you want to say and how to behave in such a conversation. Your goal is to convey the specific problems and hardships this course policy will impose on you. (You don't want to frame it as an ethical or hypothetical discussion.) Be calm but very specific. Bring in a copy of the course syllabus and refer to it at some point during the discussion. Bring in a copy of an academic document that says you need to have your grades by a certain date in order to graduate. Say specifically: "I'm concerned that this course policy will jeopardize my graduation. Can we address this?" If your instructor says "Don't worry about it right now" then explain why you are worried about it right now. Talk about your family's travel plans, talk about the financial implications of having to enroll for another semester....
(The point of the above strategy is this: I imagine that your instructor likes this course idea from his perspective. Clearly he has not taken the time to think about it from your perspective. If you make him see the negative consequences, he is much more likely to repent.)
You should not be brushed off in your meeting: this is a serious matter. If in the course of the meeting you don't see things working out to your satisfaction, you should let him know that you intend to talk to (e.g.) the department chair about it.
By the way, apparently this took place almost a year ago. What happened??
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: Your two reasons strike me as very intelligent and responsible:
1. I do not want a low-quality publication on my record, especially since it appears past students in the course published in pay-to-publish conferences.
2. I am far, far from an expert in this field. I took the course to learn about the subject and have only been spending the last few weeks on this research paper. To give more context, I don't even have a publication in my PhD work yet and I am 2 years in.
I recommend drawing them to your course instructor's attention, and requesting him to guide you in finding a low or zero-cost relevant conference to which you could submit an abstract without spending too much time when you are busy working on your PhD.
At my university, submitting an article based on the student's research is a graduation requirement. The idea is (a) to get graduands familiar with the different demands of presenting research to a conference (probably something that would benefit you since you have moved on to doctoral studies), and (b) to get more of the Masters level research out into the research literature which in many cases tends to never get beyond the university library (something in the interest of the "knowledge economy" and also beneficial to the public image of relatively young universities struggling to gain acceptance in their own nations and in the wider international arena.
The concern you raise about some of your contemporaries taking the short-cut of submitting their work to "pay-to-publish conferences" is particularly hazardous with regard to the objective (b), and your professor may find it instructive to reflect on the wisdom of your reluctance.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/04/25 | 907 | 3,668 | <issue_start>username_0: I do a lot of qualitative coding and assessment as part of my research activities. Usually my colleagues and I simply use generic tools for this process like text editors and spreadsheets, but I know that there's a lot of software out there (NVivo, Atlas.ti, etc.) that is designed for making qualitative data analysis "better".
If these pieces of software were inexpensive, I'd probably buy a package and try it out, but they're very costly (about $600 per seat) and appear rather intimidating.
**Can anyone with experience in qualitative data analysis comment on whether these tools are useful (or not useful) and are worth the high price?** (And you get a cookie if you can describe a use case that really highlights why the tool is powerful!)<issue_comment>username_1: My answer might not be as useful to you because it only deals with my personal experience. I often deal with mixed methods work and qualitative data analysis is something I do about ~25% of my time.
I have used Atlas.ti because it is provided free on my school server. However, realistically, I used Excel to code themes, categories etc. following a [grounded theory approach](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grounded_theory) (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). I don't find much use for it but I know significant numbers of professors and graduate students who swear by it. It seems to be the SPSS of the qualitative world.
One *powerful use* of Atlas.ti that I can attest to is organization, search and visualization of categories, codes, themes and performing some simple reliability measures ([Cronbach](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronbach%27s_alpha), [Krippendorf](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krippendorff%27s_alpha)) etc.
However, the same can also be done in Excel with some elbow grease. :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've used [DeDoose](https://www.dedoose.com/) in the past and found it helpful as there is a feature that can easily tell you of some codes are more or less associated with others. Although it's probably feasible to do this broadly, using a visual assessment, getting a clear confirmation was nice.
Another upside of DeDoose is that you can import audio/video and code these types of media.
I thought it was greatly helpful to code interviews and fairly straightforward textual data. I'm currently trying to coerce it into coding tables from Excel and it just won't do what I want (which is how I ran into your question), so it definitely is not perfect!
What I find helpful is leveraging the free month trial on some of these applications to see if I can actually import the data that I want to analyze.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: The tools can be useful, but note they are designed to help you manage and 'tag' qualitative data: you still have to do the analysis yourself.
A typical use case would be where you have transcripts from dozens of interviews. The software will help you go through and find quotes about particular topics, so you can quickly find them all later. Then you can read all the quotes on a topic, and see if there is consensus or difference of opinion, or if certain respondents (eg. from one area, or over a certain age) differ.
While some of the tools are expensive, other [qualitative data analysis software like Quirkos](https://www.quirkos.com) are quite cheap, but they all have free trials so you can see if they will help you. You can find [independent reviews](https://www.surrey.ac.uk/computer-assisted-qualitative-data-analysis/resources/choosing-appropriate-caqdas-package) from the University of Surrey. There are also open-souce tools like Transana and Taguette.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/04/25 | 1,336 | 5,507 | <issue_start>username_0: **Here is the story:**
After working on a project for a couple of months, I put the results in a scientific paper format in case I would submit it to a conference or yet this is a good practice for my writing. The paper is about a specific software engineering topic for which you could not find many scientific events to submit. However, I sometimes check [www.wikicfp.com](http://www.wikicfp.com) to not miss any deadline if there is one. Finally I found one, read the details about the conference and submit the paper.
This week I got the results. It was positive, I think this is great because I am warming up for academia. However, when I received the review (only one), I felt that this conference could be fake or bogus. They sent me a text file that has the following review (with the name and some strange gmail address as the reviewer email):
>
> paper quality is good different models are explained but this is not a
> result oriented paper no comparison results for different models with
> graphical point of view
>
>
>
Thank God I had a paper rejected before. I had submitted it to a workshop on a different topic and the reviews were detailed, well explained without reviewer strange email addresses.
Besides the acceptance email has details more about the registration details, bank accounts, fees etc., than preparing final draft or other scientific related issues.
So right now I am a bit confused about what to do next or how to react. But my question is the following:
**What are the good indicators of fake/bogus conferences?**<issue_comment>username_1: I have many years of academic experience and I have been a reviewer of submissions for conference presentations and scientific journals. Speaking from experience, often times the reviews given in response to a conference abstract submission can be extremely brief. This is often due to the reviewer having way more submissions to review than they ever dreamed of and a deadline of say "tomorrow" - YIKES! Serious though... Okay so moving past that, to judge the merit of a conference, I would make most of my decision based on the conference hosts or sponsoring group. If they have a large or influential membership within the discipline, who is directing the group of conference and their professional reputation, the size of the conference venue, etc... if that is all positive then I would go for it.
You might call up a colleague or two of yours in academia within your discipline and ask them if they would like to attend the conference with you. Sometimes those that are currently in the academia loop have insight about the "perceived impact" of a conference or sponsoring group.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think there is no definitive way to understand if a conference is a fake or not, but here I can suggest you a strategy.
Surely the most important indicator is the **experts' and community's opinion**: if you know someone expert in your field (maybe your supervisor?), you can ask him/her information about that conference.
Maybe you can ask also to online community members, too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In your description, there are three telltale signs that the conference might not be very good:
1. The reviewer email is revealed: **a conference that doesn't protect reviewer anonymity** (blind review at least) **is probably not very good**.
2. The review itself is, frankly, not high quality. It may make sense for a standard conference scientific committee to appoint another reviewer if the first one didn't do his job properly.
3. Financial details appear very important to the organizer…
To make your final decision, see answers to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/9362/2700): check out the organizers and invited speakers.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Seek the opinion of third parties. Here are some suggestions.
* See if the conference is indexed by a major digital library, like [Scopus](http://www.scopus.com).
* See if the conference is sponsored by a reputable professional organization, like the [IEEE Computer Society](http://www.computer.org) or the [ACM](http://www.acm.org). Although these societies sponsor all types of conferences, from top-rank to less illustrious ones, I haven't heard them sponsoring "fake" ones.
* Have a look at the [Conference Ranking Exercise](http://core.edu.au/index.php/categories/conference%20rankings/1) that has been performed by the Computing Research and Education Association of Australasia (CORE). If the conference is there, you'll get a (subjective) rank of its importance as a publication outlet. Note that the list is somewhat dated.
* Similarly, look at the [conference ranking list](http://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~zaiane/htmldocs/ConfRanking.html) compiled by <NAME> at the University of Alberta
* Consult the [automatically-compiled list](http://academic.research.microsoft.com/RankList?entitytype=3&topDomainID=2&subDomainID=0) created by Microsoft's Academic Search engine.
An [alternative approach](http://www.cg.tuwien.ac.at/~wp/beware_of_VIDEA_mail.txt) that a group of researchers followed back in 1995 is to submit silly or gibberish papers (e.g. "The Footprint Function for the Realistic Texturing of Public Room Walls", "Visualization and Intelligent Design in Engineering and Architecture ", "Distributed Multiprogramming System for Pen Selectors with Error Probability") and see whether they get accepted.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/04/26 | 1,563 | 6,848 | <issue_start>username_0: I am working on a research project that all total will probably end up lasting about two years. As the research progresses, I am writing articles about each new discovery/study, with each article becoming more relevant to current interesting trends (for lack of a better description).
What I mean by this is that in the plan for publications my group has, the first article discusses just the structure, dynamics, etc. of some new interesting carbon/silicon/etc. system. The second article will elaborate on this for an even more novel, more developed structure than the first. Then the last article will (hopefully) provide a deep new insight into how this structure can be used for energy storage/transport/etc.
As I'm sure you can tell, each article gets more interesting, and thus I think each article has a better chance than the previous one of making it into a more highly ranked journal. Our current strategy is to submit the article to a succession of less prestigious journals (each getting rejected) until it eventually gets into one. This way, it ends up getting into the journal it probably deserves to be in, and not something lower, and there's always the chance it is accepted into a highly ranked journal as well.
However, I am curious if this is a bad idea in the long run. Will editors remember "Oh, they already submitted articles to us twice and got rejected; what are they doing it for again?" Will they be quicker to dismiss the next article they receive even though it is higher-quality/deeper research than the previous one?
Or do the editors give each new submission a fair chance for acceptance, with no memory of previous submissions?
I know some of you all are journal editors, so any insight you can reveal to me about your thought process would be quite appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: I am not an editor so I don't think I can definitely say how editors treat this, but I suspect that if you keep sending manuscripts that are not appropriate to the journal, it won't be helpful in promoting your next submission and won't gain you respect. Consider the fact that you have to convince the editor why your manuscript is important in the cover letter - you don't want to keep sending a paper every week saying it is the most important paper of the decade. Even as a reviewer I can tell you it is annoying to review a paper that is clearly not suited for the journal (although maybe it is the editor's fault that it passed to review in the first place).
If you think your manuscript fits a high-impact journal, it is fine to try a few journals to increase your chances. But try to be sincere with yourself - many papers belong to specialized journals, and that is fine.
Another fact you might want to consider is that high-impact journals tend to get recognized experts in the field as reviewers. You probably don't want to gain a bad reputation in those circles. Second, the pool of experts can be pretty small which could mean that when you resubmit to a different high-impact journal, you will get the same reviewer or someone who already heard about the paper and is biased (yes, sometimes reviewers mention papers they review to colleagues).
So the bottom line is: **it is ok to resubmit a few times, but be careful not to overdo it**.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: My general answer is to try to go for a higher ranked journal first and then successively go to less prestigeous journals IF you get rejected. I think such a strategy is sound. The problem lies in identifying what would be your highest ranked journal where the specific manuscript (MS) would be appropriate.
Then, as an editor; I do not think editors remember if you get several MS rejected unless they somehow are sub-par. Remember that rejections come in different flavours ranging from MS being unsuitable for the journal (non-critical) to the science (or description thereof) being really poor (critical). In the latter case, the editor will certany remember.
So (and I just state this to make the answer more complete) make sure your paper is in really good shape, follow instructions for authors (IFA) to the point and has a clear conclusion that fits the journal scope. This relatively sinple step is missed by many! In your case, you need to try to assess why your MS get rejected and try to improve whtaever aspect might be at fault. A well written paper with a well-conceived idea and properly defined conclusion, should be publishable in my opinion. If you get a rejction on av unclear basis where the reason is not clear, ask the editor for clarifications so that you can improve the paper.
Also, (and this is more difficult) assess what journals may be appropriate and if you have the time, send it to a higher ranked journal, understanding the risk of getting a rejection might be higher. Do not forget to check out journals that is farther from you home base (Europeans look at US-based journals and *vice versa*); there is a tendency to stick to "home"-journals in some fields. In th eend the journal should be indexed to give you the official credit you may want/need.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I personally think it's a bad idea to just keep throwing papers at the door of a good journal just because it is a good journal. You seem to have a publication plan:
>
> What I mean by this is that in the plan for publications my group has, the first article
> discusses just the structure, dynamics, etc. of some new interesting carbon/silicon/etc.
> system. The second article will elaborate on this for an even more novel, more developed
> structure than the first. Then the last article will (hopefully) provide a deep new insight
> into how this structure can be used for energy storage/transport/etc.
>
>
>
If your new work is too similar to your earlier work previously rejected, many venues (especially top journals) may ding you because it is not different enough for them to consider it a completely different paper. No journal wants to re-review one they've outright rejected (even if half of it is new).
So then, look at the journals that you are targeting and check out the last 2 years or articles they have published. Be honest with yourself in thinking: "Which of my articles would look entirely in-place among these other examples?" This is not just about the importance or quality of your research, but also the scope. If they want certain data or tests, make sure you have that data. If they want formulas, better include them. If everyone cites Dr. X, better make sure he's in your lit review. Etc. Ignore the junk the journal says about its' "official" scope. Look at what they actually accept as a regular (not special issue) paper. Find the one of yours that is the best match for a particular good journal. Submit that one.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/04/26 | 604 | 2,291 | <issue_start>username_0: For my project I rely on several sources of information including such that is not peer reviewed (conference proceedings, industry reports, master thesis, interviews). I wonder if I should mark them as being not peer reviewed in the bibliography, for example adding the nature of the publication:
>
> Boo 2013: "A question on grey literature". Stack Exchange April 2013. **Forum post**.
>
>
>
or
>
> Boo 2013: "A question on grey literature". Stack Exchange April 2013. **(not peer reviewed)**.
>
>
>
Are those sources included within the list of peer reviewed articles or is a separate chapter within the bibliography necessary (as is often done for websites)?<issue_comment>username_1: References are references, and the reader already has all the information needed to make his decision on the quality of the source (the trust he has in the source) without you adding information. You don't need to separated references in different “sections” (which would make it much harder to read), or adding information. It is clear from the reference itself:
>
> boo2060, “A question on grey literature”, Academia Stack Exchange (`http://academia.stackexchange.com/`), 26 April 2013
>
>
>
that it is not a peer-reviewed journal paper, which would have a very different style:
>
> <NAME>, “A question on grey literature”, *Academia SE Monthly*, **17**, 13-14 (2013)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Sectionalised bibliographies are very common in history, where a variety of different literatures are brought together at the same time. For example, a standard bibliographic section headings I'd contemplate would be:
* Major archival sources ("Deposit A from archive B")
* Secondary archival sources ("That one letter from file X collection Y archive Z")
* Published primary sources
* Secondary sources
If I felt there was a benefit in breaking down Secondary sources by white / grey / black; theory / non-theory I would. I probably wouldn't consider doing this, because I would assume a reader would know how to tell if texts are theory or pop-history or "grey."
Breaking down a bibliography like this may be field specific due to the sources being the "evidentiary" or "empirical" element of the work.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/04/26 | 610 | 2,921 | <issue_start>username_0: Suppose I write a paper and submit it to a conference. The paper gets some weak rejects and weak accepts and lots of criticism, but the conference is not that prestigious, so they accept it anyway.
Obviously, if I agree with the reviews, I will want to change the paper (which is in part what the reviews are for). But how far can I go with these changes? If the paper is computer science, for instance, I may easily run additional experiments, or slightly change the setup and re-run the existing experiments. If I submit the paper with these results, I will basically be publishing experiments that have not, in their current form, been peer-reviewed.
At what point do changes to a submitted paper post peer review become unacceptable?<issue_comment>username_1: Following the acceptance of a paper, I would not make any changes that go beyond "editorial"—that is, improving the grammar, or adding a recently published citation. These do not change the "technical" content of the paper.
Anything where you make edits that change the actual research or results presented in the paper should be presented to the editors of the journal or conference in question, with a request for guidance. The individuals in charge can then make a determination whether or not additional peer review is required.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Once you submit a manuscript (MS) and have had it reviewed, you are not supposed to make any substantial changes such as adding data, running additional model runs or anything that would negate earlier reviews and make new reviews necessary unless specifically asked to by the editor, for example, in response to reviews.
If you receive reviews, no matter of what sort, but so that the editor allows you revisions, you should make the revisions necessary to sort out the problems. This could mean rewriting to clear out fuzzy formulations or improving figures and potentially remaking calculations, runs whatever. But, remember that typically there is a specific time frame for such revisions and any experienced editor would also judge if the revisions necessary may fit in such a time frame. If they don't rejection would probably be the proper verdict. This means that revisions cannot be extremely large and thereby time consuming for a MS to be revised.
If you think your necessary revisions need a lot of work you should possibly withdraw the MS.
In essence the editor will (or should) determine what changes are sufficient and provide you with directions. If you think (significantly) more is necessary you MS may become so different that it essentially is a different MS. You do need to discuss this with the editor to make sure this is acceptable. After all, the editor should be able to tell you what is within reason and the time frame of the publication of papers for the conference or journal to which you submit.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/04/26 | 519 | 1,962 | <issue_start>username_0: Academic scholars have written many books guiding managers at different business/industry positions. I wondered that I was unable to find any noticeable book describing the roles of a department head, dean, vice presidents, etc.
Academic scholars always guide managers in different sectors to use academic (scientific) methods for managing an organization; then, why there is no academic advancement to classify the role of university managers/administrators?
The main resources, as I searched, are few scholarly journals devoted to higher education in general.
If you know any book/resource on this matter, feel free to share.
**My question is:** if someone is just appointed as a department chair or decided to implement changes to his management system, where he can find books/guides on this matter?<issue_comment>username_1: I am not sure if this is helpful since I don't know for which academic system you are asking. Anyway, this question may also be found by other people searching for an answer to the same question, here is an answer for the German academic system:
There is the book "In Forschung und Lehre professionell agieren" by <NAME> and <NAME>. A German description is available [here](http://www.hochschulverband.de/cms1/?id=828). I haven't read the book myself, but it has got a few good reviews [here](http://www.amazon.de/In-Forschung-Lehre-professionell-agieren/dp/3924066973).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: [How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0674057333) might be very helpful for you although it does not answer your question directly. However, it generally critiques the thought and decision processes in academia.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Mathematician <NAME> has written a book: [On Being a Department Head, a Personal View](http://www.ams.org/bookstore-getitem/item=AHEAD).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/04/26 | 2,354 | 10,409 | <issue_start>username_0: Imagine that you want to conduct your undergraduate classroom in a more creative way and introduce practical projects as a part of the final grade. However, students are lazy to embrace extra activities, and all of them decide not to deliver any report.
The department does not like the trouble of failing all students in a course because of an extra project.
What would you do to implement change when students are widely resisting?
Or as `@JeffE` suggested, How to deal with a department that does not give its instructors autonomy in assigning grades?
**Additional Description:** In fact, I want to change the grading system to reduce the weight of final exam, and add to small projects (e.e.g writing a one-page about the topic under consideration). The lazy class prefer to deal with one final exam instead of continuing homework. The school does not support this method, but they do not stop me as long as there is no trouble.<issue_comment>username_1: First things first: what did your syllabus say, and what did *you* say when you assigned the project? If the assignment was a part of the final grade, and getting a zero on the project means that all the students will fail, and they *knew* this when the class began and when the project was assigned, and the project was assigned with enough time for them to produce an adequate result, then no one should complain when you fail them (or at least no one should have a legitimate reason to complain). I have a feeling that if this is not a hypothetical case, there is more to the story.
I have been guilty of deviating from the syllabus in various ways over the years, but the students knew the ramifications of that deviation, and I was always fair in my grading because of it. I find it hard to believe that an entire class skipped an assignment that guaranteed they will fail, unless of course [it guaranteed they all receive an A](http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/12/students-boycott-final-challenge-professors-grading-policy-and-get).
I think you need to provide more information for a better answer, but the bottom line is that if the students failed the class legitimately, then fail them. Just make sure you've got the means to back up your reasoning for those failures if it is indeed the entire class.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It's a very difficult position you are in. The school does not want you to fail all the students and it seems the students might know that and are cooperating to overrule you. This is the like the two prisoners (in the Prisoner's Dilemma) finding a way to coordinate their actions. In this case, as I said, you have a very difficult situation.
It seems to me that three major issues in this case:
1. The school says they give you power but they really don't. If this is the case, then you must deal with your boss (or higher) to find out what you can do and what you cannot. One way to test that power is to tell your boss that you will fail all the students because they are actively resisting course requirements. If your boss says that you *must* find a way to get the students to do the work, then you know you do not have any power and you must decide if this is acceptable to you or not. If not, go somewhere else (if you can). Otherwise, you have to live with it.
2. You may be out of touch with what the students are capable of doing. This is quite common for new teachers. For myself (when I was starting to teach undergraduate students), I thought the students would all be hard-working and dedicated to their studies but later found that they were just like most undergraduates trying to get around the work and they didn't understand the importance of studying or the importance of their university degree. I was comparing them to my graduate-level classmates (since those were my most recent memories) but that was clearly wrong of me and I was far too expecting and too strict. If you are putting on them more than they can do, then perhaps you need to reflect on the requirements you've created. Are they really reasonable for the students you are teaching?
3. The students might simply not understand how to do what you are asking them (this is related to point 2). Some students (especially 'unprepared students') need more attention and more explanations in order to do the work required in higher education. You might need to spend more time on general study skills (inside and outside of class) and less time on course content. That is, teach them how to research, how to write a lengthy report, etc. as opposed to simply teaching them about Theory A, B, and C.
There is a fourth issue which I raised in the initial paragraph and that is the students might be working together to overpower your authority. If this is the case, you must balance between finding out why they feel the need to do that - see points 2 and 3 above - (and solving the underlying problem) and maintaining your own power of authority (which requires you to challenge them back but then you're back to dealing with point 1 above).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: One direct way to solve this problem it would be to put in the final exam questions related to the projects that you have assigned. Of course, you should tell this before hand so your students know about it.
The problem of changing the weight of the final exam would be that if you have not say that clearly, at the beginning of the course; some students will take it that is not a fair measure, because maybe other lecturers are assigning a great weight to the final examination and that is also a policy of the department.
Other advice would be to write reports informing to your Faculty coordinator or Dean about what is the current situation, but also proposing solutions. In some institutions when the number of falling students is very big they blame directly to the lecturer, and that can bring problems to your academic development in that place.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Grades are best used as a formative tool to highlight areas in which students need to improve and not as a proverbial stick to punish students. You should be commended for introducing a project that you thought would be a proverbial carrot, but the problem is the students didn't see it that way. It now sounds like you want to beat the students with the stick for not liking the carrot. Instead of punishing this years students, I would suggest you talk to them so you can figure out what they did not like about the projects and work together to make the project work in the future.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It sounds to me as if you are fighting not only the administration, here, but somehow going against the established school culture with your change to small assignments. If all other teachers are requiring only a midterm and final and you switch to weekly graded assignments, students are likely to rebel, feeling that you are requiring them to do more work than students in other classes.
This is not to say that your idea is wrong; it may be a very good one, but clearly you haven't sold it to either the administration or the students. Do they understand the benefit of learning/mastering something in small bites, rather than trying absorb everything for a final? Why do you think that these smaller assignments will increase their learning, in the end?
I was a teacher educator at the high school and college levels for many years. I always told my teachers-in-training that if all or most students fail an assignment, the problem is yours, not theirs. And I include myself in this -- it took me a number of semesters to enable students to be successful at a large, semester-end project; what it required was for me to break it down into smaller parts and have due dates for each of those.
But as others have said, whatever you do needs to be built into the syllabus, so students know about it from Day One. If you do change your mind about your curriculum midstream, you must present it to students as an addendum to your syllabus, in writing, but . . . that might lead to an impression that you're changing things on the fly. Give it thought ahead of time, get it into your syllabus, or wait until next semester to make what appears, in your school culture, to be a fairly big change.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I know this was posted years ago, but I'd like to throw in my two cents, as I can relate to this question. I'm usually in a similar situation: administration not too keen on changes or failing too many students, and sometimes even the other teachers (as I don't work alone) not wanting any extra work in order to grade projects in addition to exams.
I don't think there's a magic solution here, as every group of students is different. But usually they are mostly interested in passing tests by studying as little as possible (and blame this on education systems, that focus on grades and exams instead of students learning at their own pace).
However, you can turn this into something you can use: when you give them a project, you can tell them that it will affect the kind of exam they will be doing. You can even tell them the grade will not only depend on how good or bad they did on those extra activities but will also take into account other stuff, like turning in assignments or completing a phase of a project, presenting to the class (even when it's just showing and explaining the work they did), peer reviewing could also earn them some credit. The better grade they get on the extra activities, the more benefits they will earn. So when it comes to exam time, those that worked the hardest will get the most rewards.
For instance, students that got less than a C in extra activities will have an extra question on their exam (and maybe this question will have a great impact on the overall score, or maybe they will just fail if this question is not correctly answered even if their answers to other questions are correct). Those who got a B will be granted the ability to have a helping sheet (with some information that could help them in the exam -not giving away answers but providng some hints). And finally, those that got an A would have extra points added to their exam.
As I said, every group is different and you might find out this strategy works great one year and not so much the next.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/04/28 | 748 | 2,532 | <issue_start>username_0: In my bibliography, I want to link the ISBN number to an actual website. My question is: which website is recommended to be used? Is there some 'neutral' source that I can expect to be still functioning in 5 years and that will return reliable results?
IBSN numbers are apparently provided by the [International ISBN Agency](http://www.isbn-international.org/), so this would clearly be the best source. Turns out, however, that they do not offer an ISBN lookup! I am currently considering two options:
Google Books: [http://www.google.comco.uk/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=isbn:0060930314#=10](http://www.google.comco.uk/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=isbn:0060930314&num=10)
ISBNSearch.org: <http://www.isbnsearch.org/isbn/0060930314>
Both appear to have their commercial interest, but they appear to be reliable enough. I would prefer Google. Or is there any other more recommended website?<issue_comment>username_1: Google Books is a great website and there’s nothing wrong with using it for your purpose. But if you don’t want to be dependent on Google you could use the following sites:
Wikipedia: <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ABookSources&isbn=0060930314>
The downside for Wikipedia is that it doesn’t show the book title and one has to search another time for the book. But it’s ad free and certainly still online in five years.
But I’d suggest OpenLibrary: <http://openlibrary.org/search?isbn=0060930314>
Non-profit, ad free, part of the Internet Archive. Also high possibility of availability in five years.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You could use [worldcat.org](http://www.worldcat.org), it is built and maintained collectively by the participating libraries around the world (see [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worldcat) article).
They offer ISBN search, e.g. [www.worldcat.org/search?q=isbn:0060930314](http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=isbn:0060930314)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: <http://www.bookfinder.com/> has been around for a long time and they claim they never charge a markup from search results, so although not neutral as such maybe useful?
There is also <http://www.openisbn.com/> which says
>
> OPENISBN is a personal project dedicated to provide its users ISBN search services and ISBN data, introduction, book reviews, book preview, free ebooks and book price comparison for your specific book.
>
>
>
Possibly something that will not be around for decades, but it sounds at least very neutral.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/04/28 | 1,692 | 6,948 | <issue_start>username_0: I have published some papers in some conferences, but the problem is that the people in charge put them in bibliographic repositories, such as DBLP, and they take too much time to do that.
I would like to know how I can allow more people access to my publications, so they would be able to review them, use them if they want, maybe bring more ideas or even suggest that I correct something.
Initially, I was putting them in a personal webpage that I have created, but I took them off because I also got some papers accepted by ACM and IEEE and they require a payment to see them. In this last case, if I upload them for free (on my personal webpage) could I be charged with something by these institutions?<issue_comment>username_1: You need to check with the specific rules of the journals to which you submit to determine what is or is not allowed. For instance, journals published by the [American Institute of Physics](http://journals.aip.org) allow you to publish preprints that are not created by the journal on servers like [arXiv](http://www.arXiv.org) without having to pay any fees and without other major limitations. By contrast, [American Chemical Society](http://pubs.acs.org) journals do not allow you to post preprints, *even on your own homepage*. You can link to their site, and after twelve months, the link becomes effectively "free."
But, beyond that, if you want to advertise your work, you will have to do it yourself. You can mention in it in presentations, and cite it in abstracts that you submit to other conferences. You can email colleagues or use social media (sites like [academia.edu](http://academia.edu), [LinkedIn](http://linkedin.com) or even [Facebook](http://facebook.com) to announce your paper. If you have specific colleagues you think would be interested in the paper, you can send it directly to them as well!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: From the context of your question, I assume you are a computer scientist graduate student. (Computer scientist because you mention DBLP, and graduate student because you're worried about people finding your research *quickly*.) My answer is specific to computer science, **especially the first two points.**
* **Just post your papers on your web page already.** Among other things, posting your own papers will allow Google Scholar to find and index them after only a few days. Despite scary legal language to the contrary, neither ACM nor IEEE (or SIAM, or AMS, or Springer, or Elsevier, or...) has any interest in suing individual researchers for providing copies of their own papers.
* **Post preprints of your work to the ArXiv and/or your institutional preprint server.** Again, despite scary language to the contrary, granting a license to the ArXiv to publish your papers does not deprive ACM or IEEE (or SIAM, or AMS, or Springer, or Elsevier, or even ACS) the right to later publish peer-reviewed version of your papers later. Many publishers explicitly allow you to publish post-reviewed but pre-copy-edited preprints on the ArXiv and similar servers. Posting camera-ready versions is technically illegal, but neither ACM nor IEEE has any interest in suing individual users for such violations.
* **Post publication announcements on Facebook/Google+/Twitter/your blog.** Yes, this works. Really.
* **Give lots of talks.** At a minimum, you should give talks about your results in an appropriate local seminar. But especially for really strong results, you (or your advisor) should also [arrange to have yourself invited](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1944/how-to-invite-yourself-to-present-at-another-university) to a few other institutions to give a talk.
* **Send copies of your work directly to a few colleagues.** Just send them email with a link to your web page. (*Don't* blindly send papers as attachments; remember that some people read email over the phone and pay by the byte.) But don't just spam the whole world. Limit your email to the small handful of influential people that you are *sure* will be interested — other researchers working on the same problem, people whose results you directly improve or extend, your advisor, and—**if** you're nearing a point like graduation or tenure where you need letters—a few potential letter-writers.
* **Take the long view.** It really is not important that see your results RIGHT NOW THIS MINUTE ZOMG NOW NOW NOW !!!!111¡¡¡CXI. Relax. Yes, DBLP and other indexing services operate with a delay of several months. (Although my impression is DBLP has gotten faster, thanks to some outside funding that allowed them to hire more than one human being.) And yeah, that's frustrating. But in the long run, those few months of publication delay are not going to make a bit of difference.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: You should check the conditions of your journal using the [SHERPA/RoMEO](http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/) list. Most journals allow to publish your **final draft** (designed and typeset by yourself) on your institutes server right after publication and on open-access servers like [arXiv.org](http://arXiv.org) 12 month after publication. Your institutes open-access server will also be found by e.g. Google Scholar.
Many journals will also send you an **authors copy** of your article which you can share with colleagues (e.g. via email) but you should not publish that one on the internet.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You should **read the copyright transfer contract** that you have signed.
In general, the major publishers tend to be fairly permissive nowadays as regards to online posting.
---
With [**ACM conference publications**](http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Retained), you can (and **should**) do all of the following:
* *Before* you submit the paper, post it to **arXiv.org**.
* *After* your paper has been accepted, post your *own* version of the paper (with an appropriate copyright notice) on:
1. your own **personal web page**, and
2. your **university's open access repository**.
* *Later* you can prepare a journal version ("major revision"), and you can do with it whatever you want — for example, submit it to an **open access journal**, post it online, etc.
---
With [**IEEE conference publications**](http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/copyrightmain.html), the main idea is similar: you *can* post your work to **arXiv.org** before submission and to your **own home page** and a **university-wide open access repository** after revision.
However, some details are a bit different. My reading of the policies is that with ACM you *cannot* update arXiv.org with a revised version, while IEEE *requires* that you update arXiv.org with the accepted version of the paper.
However, don't take my word, read the copyright transfer form (and additional explanations available on the publishers' web pages).
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/04/29 | 2,760 | 12,661 | <issue_start>username_0: This [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9706/journalscomputer-science-that-are-suitable-for-low-impact-publications) and this [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9651/professor-withholding-course-grade-until-submission-of-conference-paper) suggest that it is not uncommon/unheard of for departments to require publication by students (generally masters and doctoral) either to get credit for a course or graduate.
This seems to me like a way of off loading the assessment of students to peer reviewer, and therefore it seems ethically questionable. Is there a pedagogical reason to require externally peer-reviewed publication?<issue_comment>username_1: The problem certainly seems fishy and whether it is unethical or not probably depends on what the (local) rules and regulations governing courses will be as well as the possible ramafications of the process relative to those regulations.
The main issue for me is what will be the purpose of having publications as a requirement for students (not at graduate level). There is of course nothing wrong if undergraduate papers can be published, and experiencing the publication process can be valuable. But as one of the posts referred to in the question states, it seemed as if the requirement was to submit, not to publish. I do not see any particular value in that experience that could not be replicated within the department itself.
Since any publication process requires quite a chunk of time I can see a major problem in the timing. In my system, a course should be possible to complete within the stipulated time (corresponding to the number of credits). Imposing a system where publication is part could (really would) clearly violate such limitations. So, a follow-up question would be "are there systems where courses can be open ended?" or "can courses be required to last until an un-controllable goal is achieved?". If the system allows such cases, then the requirement would be ok from a legal point of view. I would still think it is in a grey zone.
Your point of off-loading the assessment is part of the shady picture. I would have thought that each university regulatory system would have some, at least, recommendations on how quickly assessments must be done and, again, assessing through journal peer review would require at least as much time as the length of a typical course itself. So as a whole, I think that using paper submission and/or publication as part of course requirements can be violations of local assessment regulations and very poor behaviour. I would call it unethical if it means unnecessarily prolonging the students graduation or impacting on their ability to get student's loans (equivalent) due to not getting credits in time (impacting their ability to take responsibility for their timing).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For an individual course (assuming a time-limited scenario, e.g. a semester, quarter, or even year), it's certainly ridiculous to have a publication requirement. The timing is far too variable, and even the best researchers can have papers rejected or discover before submission that they've been scooped. If it were possible to reliably publish a worthwhile paper within the timespan and amount of effort required for a typical course, then there would be a lot more papers published.
A requirement of submission is not as absurd, but still unreasonable. I see no advantages over a mock submission sent to the professor teaching the course, but there are severe disadvantages: it can put pressure on students to make inappropriate submissions, and it can waste the time of editors and reviewers on submissions that may be withdrawn once the course requirements are complete. My cynical interpretation is that submission requirements deliberately use the threat of professional embarrassment to encourage students to work harder, and that seems unethical.
The one scenario where publication requirements can make sense is for a degree program. For example, some PhD programs require that a dissertation must be based on peer-reviewed publications. Of course that's reasonable only in fields with a sufficiently rapid publication cycle, and even there I'm not fond of this idea personally (but I wouldn't call it unethical).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: First things first: a doctoral student *should* be expected to publish something other than a thesis. Even if she has no desire to enter into a research profession after the PhD, publication of scholarly articles should be an important milestone in the process.
Beyond that, however, expecting that a student—whether a master's student or a PhD student, or even worse, an undergraduate—publish a paper as part of a single "course"—is absurd for a multitude of reasons. First, in the context of a single educational course, the time spent will almost certainly be unsuitable for the preparation of a manuscript; moreover, given the lag times in between submission of an article to a journal or conference and its acceptance, it is unlikely that it can be completed within either a trimester or even a semester, which means that incomplete grades will likely be par for the course.
Thus, since it serves no real valid educational purpose for the students—since the work isn't being evaluated by the educational staff whose job it is to provide instruction—such behavior is extremely questionable, and very likely unethical. This is doubly so if the only criterion for grading is the acceptance of the paper in an external journal, particularly since there are so many "pay-to-publish" journals out there that will publish anything, given the page charges.
Now, I *do* require that students prepare something like a research article for one of the courses I teach. However, I do that as an exercise in *preparing* them for writing research articles. I have *no* expectation that they would bother to submit these papers to actual journals—the material just isn't sufficient for that. However, in terms of learning how to write a paper—mentioning relevant literature, explaining their methodology, clearly demonstrating and illustrating their results, there is nothing comparable. You learn to be a researcher by *doing research*—and that includes writing about research!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The answer to this question *may* depend on the country and possibly on the field. The following is based on a European CS perspective.
As other answers have noted, asking for a publication within one year or within one semester is - at least for comparably inexperienced (pre-Master) students - a rather unrealistic or at least highly uncontrollable goal (because successful publication is dependent on a number of external factors, not the least of which is what else is submitted to the same venue).
Asking for publications as a prerequisite for graduation, on the other hand, is partially a different topic, which depends highly on the degree aimed for:
* A Master's degree is commonly thought of a certification for specific verifiable skills. Everyone who invests the necessary effort and fulfils the pre-defined requirements is supposed to be able to achieve that degree. As such, I agree it is ethically questionable to outsource the evaluation of a part of the preconditions for that degree to an external body rather than evaluating the work oneself in a somewhat stable manner (i.e. in a way that two students who did more or less the same work get more or less the same mark). Peer reviews wouldn't judge the work by its fulfilment of the rules imposed for the Master's degree, but based on its contribution, suitability to the venue, and its relative value to all other current contributions.
* A doctoral degree, in contrast, is not a degree you can reproducibly achieve for doing certain defined tasks. In a way, upon starting to work for a doctoral degree, one leaves the world of studying and doing things in order to fulfil pre-defined requirements, and one enters the world of being an active researcher who does things in order to find new knowledge - which of course means that the final result is partially outside of one's realm of influence. A doctoral degree is a degree that is granted as a result of *contributing to the body of knowledge*. Hence, any particular work effort that served for someone to get their doctoral degree will not do for anyone else (because that particular contribution is not new any more), and in the hypothetical situation that all knowledge in the universe has been discovered, no-one can get a doctoral degree any more. This has rather nicely been illustrated in [a webcomic](http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/). In this case, requiring peer-reviewed publications makes sense in several respects:
+ Peer reviewers evaluate the work exactly by the desired criteria, i.e. whether the work is a contribution that is currently notable enough to warrant publication.
+ Rather than being just an idea that someone uttered, the new finding is validated by the reviews and thus has reliably extended the overall amount of knowledge.
+ Due to the aforementioned fact that the amount of knowledge that mankind is familiar with is constantly changing, what was a disadvantage in the case of the Master's degree is exactly the desired outcome here: By trying to make it a peer-reviewed publication, the work is evaluated in comparison to the current state of the art and all other work currently being done.
**tl;dr:** Binding a **Master's degree** to successful peer-reviewed publications is questionable as the degree should be granted whenever you prove your skills by completing a pre-defined set of conditions such as exams. Binding a **doctoral degree** to successful peer-reviewed publications, on the other hand, is the entire point, because a doctoral degree says *This person has successfully expanded the knowledge available to mankind.* These accomplishments are not measured by exams, but the same way as the quality of all research is measured: by peer reviews.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I would like to add some argument to the existing answers, which I first give in distilled form for clarity and on whose details I will elaborate afterwards:
**Main Argument**
As scientific publications are reports of research, requiring students to publish essentially requires them to successfully perform research. The essence of research is to explore the unknown and thus its results (and success) are not predictable. Relatedly, successful research requires amongst others luck. And luck is something that successfully finishing a course, degree, etc. should not depend on too much.
**Some comments**
* I think publications which do not require original research such as reviews are not what we are talking about here. (It may be a way out though: I know somebody, who at some point strongly considered fulfilling the publication requirement of a PHD by publishing a review after many unpublishable research approaches.)
* While failed research idealistically is also worth reporting (as it has produced the knowledge that some approach does not work), it certainly is much more difficult to publish (leading to the [publication bias](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publication_bias)). This holds even more so, if the reason for failure is not that you have run into some long cul-de-sac but there are many short culs-de-sac.
* There is some research which is very straightforward (and thus has little luck involved) as it basically consists of applying some established method to a new object where no big surprises are to be expected. For example: *Determine the distributions of volumes of organ A of rats fed with diet B.* Such research is however arguably better published in one big study going through a series of objects (e.g., organs and diets) instead of thousands of small publications, which all are essentially the same.
* When the impact of luck is sufficiently low that assessing students by publications can be considered fair depends on several factors such as the publication threshold of the field or the typical duration of experiments. Arguably this only happens at PHD level in most fields, if at all.
* Another related problem is that people being pressured to produce successful research are more likely to fake data, plagiarise or commit other types of fraud. Now, while this is a general and not totally unavoidable problem with students, requiring this to be published may also harm others who try to build upon the respective publication.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/04/29 | 1,006 | 4,132 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a Final Year Mechanical Engineering student.
I want to do my Masters in the **Design Engineering** field.
Currently I can see 2 options:
1. **Master of Science** - offered in many Universities ex: **GeorgiaTech**.
It deals more with research. It requires a research thesis most of the times.
It gets completed in about 2 years.
2. **Master of Engineering** - offered in few Universities ex: **Cornell University**.
It deals more with developing your skills required for doing a job in that field.
It does not require a research thesis. It gets completed in a year.
So, my question is:
1. What exactly do we learn/develop skills/improve/do, etc in each of these programs.
1. I am unable to get a clear picture as to what exactly will be the change in me brought by each of these programs?
2. What distinguishes a M.S. Graduate from a M.Eng. Graduate & vice versa?
3. And which one of these Graduates get jobs in Companies easily in the related field?<issue_comment>username_1: The main practical difference between the two degrees, as you point out, is the requirement of a research thesis for the MS degree. Generally, if you have aspirations of eventually getting a PhD, you should strongly consider the MS, as research experience or potential is a large factor in being admitted to a PhD program.
To answer your specific question, you should be a better researcher after completing an MS, and you will be better prepared for further graduate work. With an ME degree (considered a "terminal" degree), you'll simply have a Master's degree and (potentially) may have spent more time on your coursework. Whether or not this prepares you better for a position in industry is debatable -- as you say, many ME programs are one year, which may actually include fewer classes than an equivalent MS (although I've generally seen ME programs that have one or two more classes as a requirement than the equivalent MS degree).
As to which degree leads to more jobs in industry, I'd say it's probably about the same. Getting an MS will certainly *not* limit your competitiveness for industry jobs, while (as I already mentioned), an ME may limit your competitiveness for PhD programs.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have studied a MEng which is accredited by the engineering Council UK for chartered status. I disagree that in a MEng you don't do research, as I recall I did two group projects and a Thesis. With varied coursework and subject matter and examinations. You can do a PhD from both a MEng and MSc, it does not matter how you start, it's how you finish is the old saying.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: MSc, MEng and a PhD are all high level degrees, in the UK the highest you can be in industry from the engineering council Uk is a chartered engineer. Minimum qualification for this is a MEng or a Msc accedited by the engineering council. Even with a PhD the maxium in industry is a chartered engineer, unless you intend to go into high level research or goverment, or a big multinational or a Research and Development role then a Phd is usefull. Saying this you dont learn any new core subjects as such on a PhD program rather you research it and draw from you exsposure, experiance, and academic knowlege. After all what can they teach you academia after you get a master.., it say's what it is on the tin if you like .., you have mastered your trade.
'Chartered Engineers develop appropriate solutions to engineering problems. They may develop and apply new technologies, promote advanced designs and design methods and introduce new and more efficient production techniques, or pioneer new engineering services and management methods. The title CEng is protected by civil law and is one of the most recognisable international engineering qualifications'.
<http://www.engc.org.uk/engcdocuments/internet/Website/CEng%20Leaflet.pdf>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: MSc - focuses on theoretical work, research and is thesis based
MEng - focuses on practical applications of theories, less research compared to MSc, mostly course based work.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/04/29 | 4,400 | 18,494 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a bachelor degree in Computer Engineering. I worked as a Research Engineer in a Research Center. It was a fully paid Engineering position funded by European projects.
However, my contract ended, and because there are not any more projects available at the moment, I can't be re-contracted.
My question:
Is it possible for someone to work as a freelance researcher? I have an idea of a platform I would like to work on. The idea, I think, could easily even become a paper. Is it possible that I could continue to work in the research center without being paid, and try to perform some research of my own? Of course I could ask my supervisors about it, but the thing is, I don't know how to ask it.
What I was thinking was they could provide me tools like the computer, mobile devices and a working desk to develop my idea (things that I was provided while working there). In the end it would be something that the university could present, but I would get credit for it for my CV, and it could be especially helpful in getting a good candidate position next year, in a Masters program I am aiming for.
How could I present an idea like this to my supervisor? Is it something that actually happens?
---
Some notes in response to comments to clear things a bit: The problem is not that I need any kind of equipment to make my idea reality. At work I was provided a simple laptop and some mobile devices, that I can easily have access on my own, so nothing special there.
The reason why I would like to continue work there is as simple as that:
I want to propose an idea of a platform that I would like to create and according to my estimates would be 9-12 months of work. I could do that from my house or by going to work at the research center. **However**, I need my supervisor to draw public/scientific attention, make a paper with him out of it etc. I want to be able to write in my CV that the last 9-12 months I was working on a project at "that" research center in cooperation with "that" researcher and not that it was a "home" project that I developed.
I haven't made the proposition to my supervisor yet for the following reasons :
1. I am afraid that my supervisor could simply use my idea with the engineers that still have a contract there.
2. What I would like is to be the only one working on the project. Like a PhD thesis. I want to get credits of it. Not the research center. I want to get the credit as the main developer/author of this thing, and of course my supervisor be the one that would present it and his name next to mine. Is this even possible? I mean I don't want any other engineers sniffing their nose on it, I don't want my supervisor to demand things on the project. I am thinking of proposing a complete solution of exactly what I have in mind, let me work on it with my time, without any funding, but the supervisor be the one to present it and draw attention on it.
In the end all I am saying is to have this project on my CV to open some doors on the future and my supervisor being the mentor of this thing.<issue_comment>username_1: I cannot see any reason why you could not be a freelancer as such. Since researchers are usually employed by an academic institution or a (even one person) company and you could have your own company if you will, there obviously is no problem from that perspective.
There is obviously a big question regarding how you sustain your life. Are you planning on doing this in your spare time? In any case, supposing financing for living is not a problem I would turn the focus on affiliation. If you want to publish the material/product at some point, having an affiliation would greatly help. You mention talking to your former advisor and that is probably a good idea if you think you have a good connection there.
Before contacting a person/organization to which you would like to be affiliated, you should try to work up a good plan for your project so that there is a clear path for what you will do, where you want to arrive and also provide an analysis of how your work fits in with other work. This is essentially a project plan as you would expect from a doctoral or masters candidate. Having such a text and preliminary work/results would make the project easy (easier?) to assess and hence provide your target person/organization with a good foundation to build your project.
I have to add that I have not heard of anyone doing this but if someone came to me with an well-founded idea and told me they needed an affiliation, I would seriously consider it. If that person needed office space and resources it may be a little trickier since in my case, no office space comes free, and so there would be a financing problem. This would vary hugely between organizations and persons so I cannot say what could be expected. You do of course need to provide any requests for support in the form of office space, computer/computing facility etc clearly. How such "demands" would affect your success would have to be evaluated against how interesting the project is to the organization/person. In the case of an academic advisor, I think how closely the idea ties in with existing work affects your chances. If it is completely off the beaten track of the person, I deem chances smaller.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Of course anyone can be an independent researcher. Just do it. But that's not what you're really asking. The question you're *really* asking is this:
>
> **How can I convince my former supervisor to let me continue using their equipment and resources after my current contract ends?**
>
>
>
And the only reasonable answer that question is to turn in on its head. **What's in it for them?** How would *they* benefit from giving you an office and access to their equipment? Is the payoff *for them* worth more *to them* than the resources that you would expend? The fact that the project is good for *you* isn't enough.
There's an even more basic question: **Do they have resources that they *can* give you access to?** The equipment that you want access to may be tied to the specific project. They may not be *able* to give you access. But the only person that can answer *that* question is your former supervisor.
---
Some updates in response to the updated question:
>
> However , i need my supervisor to draw public/scientific attention , make a paper with him out of it etc.
>
>
>
**No, you don't.** You can write and submit a paper yourself. You can publicize it yourself. You can ask your former supervisor to help you publicize it; if your supervisor was your *advisor* and not just your boss, they'll be happy to help you, because your success makes them look good.
>
> I am afraid that he could simply use my idea with the engineers that still have a contract there.
>
>
>
You don't trust your supervisor. So don't work with him. Your mistrust is probably misplaced, but that's your call. To quote <NAME>: "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats."
>
> of course my supervisor be the one that would present it and his name next to mine
>
>
>
Why "of course"? Just do it yourself.
>
> i dont want my supervisor to demand things on the project.
>
>
>
No, that's not how it works. If you want your advisor to put his name on something, you **must** give him partial responsibility for that something. That's what coauthorship *means*.
>
> I am thinking of proposing to him a complete solution of exactly what i have in mind , let me work on it with my time , without any fundings , but he ll be the one to present it and draw attention on it.
>
>
>
In other words, you want to do all the fun stuff, using your supervisor's resources, and leave the hard work of writing and presenting to your supervisor, but not allow them any actual input, and then claim credit for yourself.
That's just not going to happen. If you want something from someone else — working space, laptops, Internet connection, help with writing and presentation, anything — you have to offer them something in return. Either offer to make your supervisor a full partner, including veto power, or you do the work yourself, including all the writing and presentation, with your own equipment, on your own time.
Having the project on your CV will open more doors if you do it *without* your supervisor.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: About doing Research (without being payed)
==========================================
* Whereever I have worked so far, we'd have gladly let an office table for a good student who wanted to stay. (Computer may be more difficult, in many places students prefer to bring their laptops which are better than the university computers).
Actually, where I'm now we try to keep the good students with small paid jobs between their research practica / theses, because it is a lot of effort to train a student. Of course, noone wants to keep a bad student. But wanting to go on with research has a strong positive correlation with being a good student.
=> talk with your supervisor about possibilities.
* Just BTW: I was lucky enough to experience workplaces where the supervisors considered it unethical to let people work without payment.
* Another issue is insurance. As long as you sit just somewhere with a computer, things are usually fine. However, without a proper contract (work or research practicum), you usually cannot work in any kind of lab.
* Depending on the kind of work you propose, there may be possibilities to get some funding (if it is programming rather than scientific, maybe [GSoC](https://developers.google.com/open-source/soc/) would be worth trying). Talk to your supervisor. Search the internet.
About Freelancing
=================
You need to check the freelancing rules in your country. You mentioned only that you were previously "funded by european projects". Maybe someone can tell you more if we know your country.
* A first step towards successful freelancing could be attending start-up business lectures/courses at your university/local vocational school/[IHK](http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/IHK) (though as a freelancer you'd want to avoid joining them). My university offered such lecture series in the evening, so people could attend regardless of their studies/job.
* Find out whether/how much jobbing/business your university allows (you don't want to loose the possibility to enter the master courses)
* Find out what formal rules you have to follow: e.g.
+ do you need to get a particular tax number?
+ what information needs to be written on your business communication/invoices (e.g. said tax number)?
+ *tons of other things to be aware of*
* E.g. in Germany unless you have private health insurance you want to be careful that your health insurance doesn't put you into the full-time freelancer category: this comes with a *minimum* fee that corresponds to a gross wage of about 1900 €/month!
As student, you want either to stay in the student (lowest & fixed fee) or in the PhD student category (lower minimum fee).
* In Germany, if you want to be a freelancer and work exclusively for your university, you'd better learn about [Scheinselbständigkeit](http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheinselbst%C3%A4ndigkeit) and how to convince the social insurance that this is not the case with you. Best way to do that is being able to point to another customer.
This is another point why your supervisor may not want to enter such a business relation with you: if that suspicion comes up, not only you but also he'll have a lot of trouble.
* Many German universities have a very bad reputation wrt. paying late.
I can attest to that from experience, and I also know some closeby resaurant who'd not allow university to pay by bill - normal companies could, but university had to pay in cash for exactly this reason.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: username_2's answer is absolutely correct and excellent. I want to say more about what you can do.
In your question,
>
> i dont want my supervisor to demand things on the project.
>
>
>
and
>
> my supervisor being the mentor of this thing.
>
>
>
contradict to each other.
You want a mentor and you don't want him demand things. **Why would somebody spend time and resources for you without knowing what you're doing? How would he know your platform idea is really good and workable without you presenting the idea to him first?**
You need to make a choice between the two options.
**Either**
>
> If you want him to be the mentor, present your platform idea to him. He and you can work together to decide what to do next. You want to do something like a PhD thesis. Do you realize that every PhD student have to go through admission procedure (you need to be admitted) and most PhD students have to pass qualified exams (you need to be qualified)
> before doing thesis?
>
>
>
**Or**
>
> If you don't want him demand things on the project, you work on your platform idea **on your own**. Go all the way by yourself. All you need are *tools like the computer, mobile devices and a working desk*. You should be able to afford to them. At the end, write a paper, put it on [arXiv](http://arxiv.org/). Once you have the arXiv version, go to your former supervisor. You two can work out how to present it.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Your research contract ended, and there is no option for renewal. You want to work on a project which is your idea, but you need some technical and human resources from your position to realize the idea. You want to self-motivate your work, which is not related to an idea of the institution or your advisor, but you then want him to author a paper with you?
What you really need to do, I think, is nail down exactly what this is that you are building, and decide what you want to get out of it. In academia, the standard deliverable is a paper or conference discussion, but in freelance, you are typically trying to build a specific working product for a customer.
If you want to build this product, and think it has value for other customers or users, then go right ahead. It sounds like, though the institution would be helpful, you can do it on your own. If that's the case, and you believe you have a novel, valuable product, then you have no time to waste: pack up your desk, open your home office, and get coding. Maybe you start an open source project, maybe you sell a proprietary application. By being out of the institution, you make sure that you have complete control of your invention, in case it takes off.
I guess what I'm asking is, if you have a great idea, is an academic paper really the best place you can put it? Of course, academic researchers have to publish their work: it attracts funding and attention to their work, and allows their ideas to spread. If you're not an academic researcher, though, why publish (in a journal)? Microsoft doesn't publish their findings, they publish software on disks. CocaCola doesn't publish their secret formula, they bottle it and sell it.
Coming out of undergraduate, I can see why you feel pressure to publish. Published papers seems to be a litmus test for a researcher's efficacy. Do you think, however, that your having started an open source project or software company will look bad on your future job or grad school applications? Of course it won't.
The other thing that you'll get from being straight from undergrad, is the idea that you will be able to write a publication quality paper, one that your advisor will be comfortable with his name on, without any external support. Mentoring a paper is not simply a side job or friendly favor from your advisor. Even if your advisor did agree to mentor you on your paper, do you think his supervisor would want the institution's time, name, and resources going to something which does not have the institution's approval or funding?
If you are still feeling that you'd like to go for an academic publication, then by all means, do so. Many, many students decide they'd like to work on full-time research after undergraduate. What do they do? They go to grad school, where a research mentor advises them on a publication, which sounds exactly like what you're looking for. If you already have an area of research and a project in mind, you can set yourself apart from many other applicants. Look for schools or institutions with closely related research, contact the researchers and see if they have spots!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: **Consider applying to do a research master's degree at that university!** Many universities will accept any master student if they don't require funding or secure their own. And they'll provide a desk. 9-12 months is the effort typically required for a master's thesis (assuming you meant full-time). As a master student you can usually do your work at a university research center. And you'll have to take a few courses that you basically choose yourself.
So, just apply for a master's, and start working on your platform (and your thesis book) right away. I'm sure while you develop, you'll soon figure out that there are things you want to learn more about. So you take courses or directed studies on these topics along the way (your supervisory committee needs to approve these). And bang 20 months later you might defend and walk out with a degree. Being in a formal master's program also gives you lots of handy support such as: having a supervisory committee that gives feedback on your project every couple weeks, your supervisor that is regularly available for questions, fellow students you can co-operate with, access to university counsel for help with writing your platform's terms of use, the journal access provided by the university library, access to presentation and writing training, and many more.
And if you end up disliking the process or the courses or whatever, finish your platform, publish it, and quit the program.
If that option is financially viable depends a lot on the circumstances. Like are you studying in your home state? Does the university charge tuition? 1k or 50k? Do you qualify for financial aid? Are you willing to TA? Can you secure your own funding? Seriously, figure out if there is a software foundation that might give you a grant! Who knows, you might find a fund that will pay your student living expenses.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/04/29 | 433 | 1,969 | <issue_start>username_0: We had prepared the paper and applied for National Conference. After some days came to know about the International Conference and improved the paper and applied for it. After a month we got an accept mail from Springer Conference(Not expected as we are beginners). Today we presented our paper in the National Conference and our paper was selected as the Best Paper as well as got shortlisted for the International Journal. Now we are totally confused what to do ? Can we accept for publishing in the Journal but the Slight Modified (Improved) paper will be getting published in Springer Conference in July this year. Will this lead to any problem ?
This would help a lot in boosting our resume and also getting an Admit from Good University for my Masters.<issue_comment>username_1: The only thing you can really do here is to contact the organizers and publishers of both journals, and indicate what is going on. More likely than not, you will need to withdraw one of the papers, as publishing both papers under very similar titles with identical scientific content (or very nearly so) is considered inappropriate.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **You *must* withdraw the second conference submission.**
Simultaneous submission of the same paper to multiple conferences or multiple journals is completely inappropriate. If you do not withdraw, you run the very serious risk of having **both** submissions rejected and your invitation to the International Journal rescinded
>
> This would help a lot in boosting our resume and also getting an Admit from Good University for my Masters.
>
>
>
No, it wouldn't. In the long run, publishing the same paper in multiple equivalent venues will only hurt you. To put it bluntly, that's a form of academic fraud. If I discovered that a graduate student in my department had done this, *even before they were admitted,* I would recommend immediate dismissal.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/04/29 | 948 | 3,791 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student doing independent research. My research work is selected for presentation at a very reputed conference in the US. I am from India. **I cannot afford to attend the conference at all. How should I fund my trip?** The travel grant for students available from the conference is very low. It can hardly buy me a one way ticket. What are my options?<issue_comment>username_1: The only option I can see is:
* start a PhD at a place that will have money
* get them to pay for your trip.
There may not be enough time to carry out this plan. But having a paper accepted at a reputed conference certainly will contribute to you getting a PhD position at a good university.
This assumes that you want to do a PhD.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I've seen several solutions to problems like this.
* Ask someone else to present it. Your supervisor, or another professor at your university may be able to travel. Alternatively, they may know someone else nearby who is attending the conference already. As a final alternative, they might know someone in the US who is planning to go. I have seen people add the presenter as an additional author on papers. Not sure about the ethics of this, but it could be used as an incentive.
* Contact the conference organizers directly, and explain your situation. Their general travel grants budget may not be the only source of funding available. You might be able to get some funding in exchange for helping with the conference registration desk, for instance.
* If your paper made it into a top tier conference in the US, it is likely it will be accepted at other top tier venues. Consider a journal publication (no travel required). I also see many top tier conferences in places like Beijing these days, so you might be able to find one closer to home.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are several strategies for this in addition to the usual ones outlined previously. I assume you are in CS/IS/IT from your profile. Your primary costs are conference registration fees, air fare and living expenses.
1. If its a top conference, it will have student volunteer positions. For instance, [this](http://chi2013.acm.org/organizers/student-volunteers/) and [this](http://cscw.acm.org/participation_sv.html). This defrays cost of registration (free) and some of your living expenses (food and some cost of living). Apply for it immediately.
2. You mention that you are getting some travel grant from the conference. Thats a good thing. Keep it for airfare.
3. If its a ACM/IEEE conference, it will be sponsored by a SIG. SIGs have their own funding. For instance, see [this](http://www.websci12.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/SIGWEB-StuTravel.pdf) and [this](http://www.podc.org/student-travel/). If you are an ACM/IEEE member then you can apply for these funds which are independent of conferences.
4. Sometimes, in limited ways, industrial research labs and other government labs have funding. Search for and apply for these. For instance, see [this](http://www.siam.org/meetings/da10/mstsupport.php) , [this](http://dbtctep.gov.in/index.php?option=proposal_instructions&proposal_type=50&instruction=1) and especially [this](https://research.microsoft.com/en-us/collaboration/global/india/travel_grants.aspx).
I was once a poor student and had to make use of multiple sources of funding to go to conferences. You can also do it ! Basically, apply for everything that you find and see. Of course, the best way is to simply ask another co-author or someone actually visiting the conference to present the paper.
Another way is to just pay the registration fee (which is comparatively less). That way your paper is still indexed in the ACM DL or IEEE Xplore etc.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/04/30 | 1,003 | 4,088 | <issue_start>username_0: On [arXiv](http://arxiv.org/) one can license a preprint on one of the following (see also [a note on arXiv on licenses](http://arxiv.org/help/license)):
* [arXiv.org perpetual, non-exclusive license to distribute this article](http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/license.html) (Minimal rights required by arXiv.org. Select this unless you understand the implications of other licenses.)
* [Creative Commons Attribution license](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
* [Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike license](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/)
* [Creative Commons Public Domain Declaration](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/)
For cases when it is fine to submit a paper on *arXiv.org perpetual* (see also [Does publishing a paper on arXiv prevent me from submitting it to a non-open access journal?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7/does-publishing-a-paper-on-arxiv-prevent-me-from-submitting-it-to-a-non-open-acc)), when I can safely use **CC-BY** (Creative Commons Attribution license)?
Ideally, I would use it all the time, as it is the most permissible (=open) license, which requires attribution. (However, [I used it only once](http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.1031), it a case where I don't intend to send it to a journal; so, except for that case, when one should (or shouldn't) be afraid of using CC-BY on arXiv?)
EDIT: Here the emphasis is on **arXiv perpetual** vs **CC**, not on choosing between CC licenses.<issue_comment>username_1: There's no way to know except by checking with the journals you have in mind. In mathematics, almost all journals will be OK with the default arXiv license, but most of them have copyright terms that would be incompatible with the CC licenses. Some may make an exception for you, but I would guess that many commercial journals would not (and probably some non-commercial ones, too - for example, the ACM is not friendly towards this sort of thing). Because this would often involve an exception to posted policies, I don't think there's any way to find out systematically besides asking individually. They may also be reluctant to make any general statements that could be interpreted as a precedent.
So in mathematics, I would be wary of the CC options unless you are sure you will submit only to the minority of journals that allow this. (And, of course, you should never choose any license without agreement from all coauthors.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Using a **CC-BY** license on arxiv.org will be fine whenever you don't need to retain exclusive rights. **CC-BY** is a non-exclusive license, and you are free to grant as many non-exclusive licenses as you wish. However, you won't be able to grant a exclusive license thereafter, which is what most commercial publishers are looking for. The typical "*transfer of copyright*" would essentially be an exclusive license in these cases.
If you intend to publish the paper submitted to arxiv.org with an open access publisher, it should generally work with a CC-BY license. Most open access publishers require only a non-exclusive license to publish a paper, so there would be no conflict here. It may however not be possible to go to a publisher which requires either an exclusive license or a copyright transfer afterwards.
Interestingly, a copyright transfer may be less restrictive than an exclusive license in this case. In principle, it should be possible to transfer copyright even if a license have already been granted to someone else (that's how a company would buy software from another company that has already been licensed). So, why not try the following with your next paper:
1. Submit it to arxiv under a CC-BY license.
2. Submit to a commercial publisher, and add a statement like this to the copyright transfer agreement:
>
> "This agreement is with the understanding that a non-revocable, non-exclusive license under the terms CC-BY has been granted to a arxiv.org."
>
>
>
I wonder how they'd react...
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/01 | 1,180 | 5,044 | <issue_start>username_0: I've been thinking about how to improve attendance in my classes as well as how to get my students do the expected work outside of class. I've tried a lot of sticks but the weak students care very little and I end up failing what seems like too many of them.
Lately, my mind has turned to [gamification](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamification) (that is, using elements of the gaming world such as badges, points, and similar things used even here on SE sites) to encourage student engagement.
While reading in English, a lot of what I found is about students in western countries. There has been plenty of research showing that there are significant differences introduced by culture, and to paraphrase Blaise Pascal, what is true in one country is false in another.
Since I teach in Asia, I'm wondering if anyone knows of any studies (or has any experience) using gamification in Asia to improve students' performance.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have any citations or literature for you and I can only base this off personal experience. So, consider this answer as a single data point and completely anecdotal. I went to one of the top Indian schools for statistics as a masters student. Usually, it was all about doing math in each one of our courses.
However, in one of courses, we had a really cool professor who had just returned after spending about 10 years teaching in various other universities internationally. He didn't use any techniques like badges etc. However, we had a online running tally of points based on certain things in class - homework, data analysis, coding etc. - based on the understanding that he would take the top students out for lunch as a reward for doing well all semester.
Anecdotally, it was a lot of fun. :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: While not exactly an answer to your question ...
I should start by saying I am not an expert in the field of education or learning sciences, but it appears your gamificiation strategy is based upon extrinsic motivators. In my opinion, Malone and Lepper (1987) make a pretty clear case that intrinsic motivators are the way to go. Therefore, asking a question about how to optimize extrinsic motivators seems like a premature optimization problem. The framework that Malone and Lepper (1987) set out with individual motivators (challenge, curiosity, control and fantasy) and interpersonal motivators (competition, cooperation, and recognition) seems like it should be universal, although how to achieve those motivators, and the relative strengths of them, will likely vary with culture.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not aware of any study on using gamification in Asia to improve student performance. The following is based on my observation of college education in Taiwan in Asia.
Gamification can certainly be used as a tool to assist you with encouraging the student engagements. I don't know how effective it will be and how long its effects can last.
Everyone knows that students' motivation is the key reason for students to learn. Gamification will make the game awards to be one of the motivations. You make them learn for the game points they earn. I am not too sure this is a good thing in your environment. There is one difference between Western world and Oriental culture. Gaming is generally considered a not serious good thing. Some students/parents/school officials would resist it. You could get back fire when you use it. You need to be careful. I would use it as the last resort when everything else fails if I were you.
Many Taiwan students attend college because their parents want them to. They are in your classroom not by their own will. They lack motivation to participate in your class. All they want is to graduate to make their parents happy. And then they can do the things they truly want to do.
For those students, I seriously doubt gamification would do any good. I don't believe their parents will be much happier when they see that their kids earn some game points in the classroom. What they truly want to see are degree diploma and good transcripts.
Now, my suggestion as how to encourage the students to learn.
>
> **Talk to them to find out what they truly want to do after graduation. Convince them what they learn in your class will be helpful to their future.**
>
>
>
For example, many college students in Taiwan want to run coffee shops after they graduate. (Please don’t laugh, this is for real. I don’t understand why either.) As a business professor, you can tell them they need to learn business management so they can run coffee shops successfully.
I have reasons to believe whatever happen in Taiwan may have happened in other places in Asia because the cultures are similar. The problem you are seeing in your area may be different. I believe my suggestion would still be helpful, that is, talk to them to find out what’s the best interest for them. Once you find the root cause, the solution will be right there.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/01 | 2,712 | 10,851 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently a first-year graduate student, now in the process of figuring out who I'd like to have as my thesis advisor. Of course, compatibility of research interests is quite important, but personality and work style are too.
The issue I'm currently facing (though it sounds odd to cast it in a negative light) is that the professor with whom I'm most compatible research-wise, is the most polite, nice, and soft-spoken person I've ever met. In lecture and in conversation, he is self-effacing, will go out of his way to make things comfortable for you, never says a bad thing about anyone, etc.
Now, even though I love my field, I've been a procrastinator for as long as I can remember, and my concern is that I'm eventually going to lose my focus / energy if my advisor is constitutionally unable to say things like "You ought to have read more this week", "You should do a better job of this write-up", etc
My question is, should I opt for Professor <NAME> whose research I like slightly less, but who will do a good job of keeping me working, or should I go with Prof<NAME>? If I do go with Professor <NAME>, what strategies could I employ to make sure the effect of his coddling is minimal?
I've discussed this with peers, and I received the following advice:
* You're going to have to become self-driven eventually - might as well start getting practice now.
* Meet with Professor Tough Love regularly, sort of as an unofficial second advisor, who (besides discussing technical material, which is of course beneficial) will give me the impetus I need.
* Directly ask Professor <NAME> to give me more structure, and to be more demanding of me.
Thoughts about these? Any other suggestions?
I realize there's some overlap with [How to avoid procrastination during the research phase of my PhD?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/5786), but I suppose I'm asking specifically about what to do when my advisor is not automatically going to be a resource for helping me avoid procrastination.
Thanks for all of your help in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: Given the number of questions on this forum about dealing with intransigent advisors, I'm surprised you even have to ask. I understand your concern about Professor Nicenik, but ultimately the first and third pieces of advice you mention are what I'd suggest as well (ie you're going to need to be self motivated, and you can ask your advisor to help, as long as you don't rely on it).
I wouldn't necessarily recommend consulting with Professor Toughski on a regular basis, although informal chats from time to time might help.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: To be sure, **chooosing your advisor is one of the most important decisions in your academic career**. That is not to say that people don't switch advisors for one or more reasons (they do), but it's probably best to take the time to figure it out now (which it sounds like you are doing by asking the question in the first place!) so you aren't faced with that decision later.
It seems to me that you may be asking the wrong question, to some extent. Relying on your advisor to push you is more or less the opposite of a good way of growing into being an independent researcher -- who is going to push you when you become that assistant professor and you're on your own? Furthermore, the last thing you want your advisor writing in his/her recommendation letter is, "Great researcher when pushed to complete the work!" You also don't want your advisor to think that he/she *has* to push you -- this may just lead to a poor working relationship between the two of you.
My advice is to ask <NAME> to be your advisor, but also start working now towards limiting the procrastination on your own. That advice is predicated on your comment that your research matches his the best; that should be the driving factor and not some grand idea that you'll get pushed harder by one prospective advisor or another. Tips for how to get a good plan together are outside the scope of this topic, but at the very least you could start by fixing a date you'd like to graduate and working back from there.
As for meeting with the other professor regularly, by all means do that if he is amenable to the idea. I met regularly with my advisor and another professor and all parties were happy with the arrangement.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'd say it depends on the ultimate outcome you want? Academia is one of the most unstructured professions you can find, so I'd say that unless you can overcome some of the procrastination, it'll be pretty difficult to keep going with it. On the other hand, I have friends who intentionally picked supervisors that would push them, for exactly the reasons you described, and were in technical fields with intention of going to industry. I don't see anything wrong with that course of action either. It depends on what works for you too. Personally, I find encouragement really motivating, but hate being told what to do, so actually think that Prof Nice Guy sounds better all around. That's a personal choice though.
If you're doing a PhD with the intent of going into academia, here's an excellent article with a few more factors to consider too: <http://genomebiology.com/2013/14/4/114>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I gave an answer [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/11328/7760) that could interest you. In short:
You need to determine how much time you want your advisor to spend on your case. Maybe someone who has a lot of time to discuss various issues with you is preferable even if he/she is too 'nice'...
And nice or not, your advisor has to be firm and polite, as he/she will more or less be your mental punching bag, so with whom can you imagine to live in your head during 3+ years ?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In addition to other good answers: It's not entirely clear but that two issues are being blurred here. After all, a person can give useful critical feedback while still being positive, and, oppositely, can be a jerk without imparting useful advice. However, it seems to happen quite often that at least in our mental constructs (as in @username_4's answer) over-simplify or caricaturize.
"School" often has the strange effect of encouraging an odd passivity, that people take no initiative, but only respond to "threats" (of bad grades, of embarrassment). Obviously this is undesirable, but seems to be what we have. Years of conditioning in such a system creates an unfortunate frame of mind. Equally obviously, unless one plans to take a job in which "motivation" is a boss standing over you and threatening you, being a self-starter is a critical virtue to *cultivate*. Academe, vaguely-structured or unstructured as it is, may be an extreme case.
Clearly one cannot instantly become a self-starter, and, equally, some degree of procrastination seems universal. Requires some degree of vigilance to fight back.
Grad school might be the time to change the source of "motivation", depending less on "teachers' threats" and more on personal goals.
If/when that part of the question is recognized as separate from "personality", there does remain a very serious issue of getting useful information from an advisor. I believe that it is possible to remain completely civil and *personally* respectful, even sympathetic, while giving accurate technical/scientific opinions. If it is the case that the nice-and-polite person is also not imparting information, that's bad, and it would also be bad if an intimidating, mean person didn't actually impart useful information (but was just scary).
So I'd try to be sure to separate the issues of motivation and information-acquisition.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Different advisers have different styles. Choose the one that works for you.
**Tough Love.**
Pros: Will push you to get results. By virtue of being pushy, may also have grant money. May also push other people to have your thesis defense go smoothly and/or find you internships or a job afterwards.
Cons: Can take advantage of you by, effectively, asking you to do "menial" work for him such as preparing Powerpoint presentations, coauthoring papers with you where you did all the research, etc.
**Nice Guy.**
Pros: Won't waste your time. Also, a nice to be around a nice person ;-) You may end up becoming good friends.
Cons: If you are not sufficiently organized or self-motivated, you may end up with nothing.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm a procrastinator too, in fact I'm procrastinating right now! I'm also a 3rd yr PhD student with a Prof. Nice Guy style supervisor. If you think your supervisor wont be able to 'force' you to do the work then that's not really a problem. You just have to know how to work with it. Here's a tip:
Tell you supervisor at the end of each meeting where you expect to be by next meeting. If you're anything like me you don't plan on procrastinating, it just happens. You'll be motivated to say you'll do the work in the meeting because you have the best intentions. You'll then have to stick to it out of the meeting because Prof. Nice Guy will be expecting you to have completed what you said you'd complete. It's a hack to force you to act like Prof Nice Guy is Prof Tough Love!
Hope this helps, I should probably get back to work now. Oooo youtube.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: This is the weirdest question. Motivation should come from within!
Why are you relying on others to direct and dictate your goals in life?
If you want to be truly successful with your degree, stop worrying about
the "Nice-Guy" being too nice, and start being interested in your chosen
field. If you have sufficient interest in the field, you'll not require
anyone to drive you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: **You're going to have to become self-driven eventually - might as well start getting practice now.**
Yep, this.
**Meet with Professor Tough Love regularly, sort of as an unofficial second advisor, who (besides discussing technical material, which is of course beneficial) will give me the impetus I need.**
Might help, but as a seasoned procrastinator you may find it easy to dismiss their tough love as a wooden spoon (if I may mix metaphors).
**Directly ask <NAME> to give me more structure, and to be more demanding of me.**
Could try, but technically s/he is doing all these things, just in the nicest possible way. You can ask a person to be more scary, but I don't think you'll get very far.
Warning: Prof Nice Guy may be nice, but that does not mean they are stupid. They can see things are not progressing, and at some point pull the plug -- always in the nicest possible way. Or blithely allow you to fail the whole thing.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/05/01 | 1,796 | 7,839 | <issue_start>username_0: When applying for post-doctoral and faculty positions you are typically asked for three (sometimes more) reference letters to support your application.
Given that it is competitive out there, it also makes sense to apply for all positions that are good matches to your qualifications and career development goals (in the case of post-docs).
Sometimes this may mean asking for several reference letters (or pre-application "can you support me if required?" requests) in a short space of time.
Also, there may only be a small pool of people (i.e. 3 or 4) who know your work sufficiently well to give an excellent reference.
I have also been told that referees want to help you out, and that there is no reason to fear asking them. And, that in many cases once a letter is written it can typically be quickly repurposed. But there must be a breaking point.
How do I manage this without being disrespectful? How many requests in a given unit of time is too many, or harms my credibility? I am asking this question in this forum, as I am interested in the norms in the academic world, which are often somewhat different than the rest of the working world.<issue_comment>username_1: I am not sure what would be called a norm since it is likely to vary from place to place, but more importantly person to person. I think a person is more liely to write many letters if you have worked more closely with that person, through for example thesis work etc. If you ask someone who has had little contact then the number is less. The basis for this i sof course that a person with whom you have worked much has more to say than someone you have barely talked to duing, say, a class.
The best approach would be to actually talk this over with the persons you wish to have writing letters. Explain what you will do and ask if they would be willing to write provide the letters for you. If you are open and frank about it they could provide you with a routine around the job that would work for both of you. What I personally feel frustrated about is if I am pressed into writing letters over-night, but if I have a say in when and with what head time I can expect then it is less of an issue. So, provide the basisi for a good working relationship.
A final point is that what is too much in this case highly depends on how you communicate your wishes or expectations and showing that you understand that writing these letters takes time and effort on behalf of your references.
So, sorry, no number can be given.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Will the same letter do for many of the jobs to which you're applying?
In math, many jobs are on MathJobs, the recommender can upload a single letter, and the applicant cannot read it but can have it sent anywhere. I also know that some departments maintain files of letters on behalf of their students, with a similar purpose. There are also commercial services that do this, such as [Interfolio](http://www.interfolio.com/services/recommendations/).
I recommend seeing if similar services are available to you, and are acceptable to the institutions to which you'll be applying.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You should just ask. I'm sure the professors have all dealt with this many times, and will not have a problem with it; it's understood that sending out letters of reference is part of the job of being a professor and that candidates will be applying dozens of places. I'm sure your references will already have solutions they're comfortable with. If you're in a field where many physical letters need to get sent out, it's quite normal for a professor to simply give a copy of the letter to a secretary and have him/her make copies and send them out.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: For faculty positions it is not uncommon to ask for letters to be sent to dozens of institutions; I know someone who applied for around 80 positions, for example (which was noticed to be rather a lot by the people who wrote him letters, but they still sent them).
For postdoctoral positions, you should plan on fewer; in most cases, the letter is not the first step. You have a CV and presumably publications; you may have met your advisor-to-be at conferences; and so on. If the person/people in charge of hiring you seem potentially interested and you are serious about the position, go ahead and ask for a letter. If you are merely curious, try to do your part of the work first, especially if your former advisors etc. will have to tailor their letter each time. Sending one letter to eighty institutions is easier in most ways that writing five letters with different details. Still, that said, as long as you're pursuing reasonable opportunities and you're gracious, most people willing to write you letters will send as many as it takes. (Keep in mind, though, that if you ask for dozens of letters for postdoc applications and are never offered a position, it is probably not the case that you just need to ask more!)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> How do I manage this without being disrespectful?
>
>
>
**Just ask.** Ask *at least* a month before your first deadline. (Ideally, your writers should be people who know you well enough not to be surprised by your request.) If possible, ask in person. Give them as much information as you can about where you're applying, including your *complete* application package — CV, statements, sample papers, names of your other references, everything. Ask for feedback. Listen. If they agree to write you a letter, keep them regularly updated as your CV and application targets change.
Most importantly: **Given your references a way to tell you which letters they've sent.** This could be as simple as "Please send me email when...", or a private Google doc listing your application targets and deadlines. (From personal experience: Having a common Google doc for *all* your letter writers is particularly effective, since each writer can see when the *other* writers have sent their letters.) Check regularly that your references are actually sending their letters, **and bug them *mercilessly* if they haven't yet.** This is *not* being disrespectful; this is helping them to do the job they agreed to.
Finally, keep your references updated whenever you get an interview, get a job offer, or accept a position. **Don't forget to say thanks.**
>
> How many requests in a given unit of time is too many, or harms my credibility?
>
>
>
That's entirely up the the individual writer. But as Rex says, it's common for one applicant to apply for dozens of positions. When I agree to be a reference for someone's faculty search, I generally expect to send letters to **30–50** different targets. I can use (nearly-)identical letters for most targets, but inevitably there are major variations. For example, tenure-track faculty positions, industrial research lab positions, and postdoc positions all require different letters, even when the applicant is applying to all three types of jobs.
Moreover, there is no standard mechanism for submitting letters. Some places want letters submitted in parallel with the application; others ask automatically when the application is submitted; others ask only when the application passes an initial filtering stage. Some places want letters by email; others use standard services like MathJobs; others use home-grown web pages; a rare few still require paper letters with wet signatures.
**This is what agreeing to write a job letter *means*.** Most faculty already know this and won't agree to act as your reference unless they're willing to do this much work. Still, just as it's important to ask "Can you write me a *strong* letter of recommendation?", it's important to be completely up-front about the *scale* of your request.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/05/01 | 1,930 | 7,904 | <issue_start>username_0: What's the expected level of paper to be submitted to top level conferences in theoretical computer science (FOCS/SODA/STOC)?
I think there should be four main concern:
1. Is it a novel results?
2. How hard is the paper?
3. Generality and extension of the results.
4. Is it an interesting topic?
But actually I cannot imagine how reviewers are going to measure above concerns, e.g, If in some paper there is 10 mediocre result means is good? ...., also I don't know is there any other important thing that we should be careful about it for top conferences.
Actually someone can try to send the paper to the FOCS/SODA/STOC and see if is rejected then send it to some other conferences, but IMHO this is not appreciated. It's good if referees to related conferences help to understand what did they expecting for top conferences?
P.S1: Actually one of an important things in all the conferences is writing style, but suppose all preliminary stuffs like writing are OK.
P.S2: I could talk about this with my adviser, but also it's very appreciated to see other top conferences reviewers/participants/... opinion about this.
P.S3: Also experience of reviewers in similar fields would be very appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: When I review a paper for a conference or a journal, this is how I answer these questions:
>
> Is it a novel results?
>
>
>
Do I know something equivalent? Do the authors make a good job to compare their approach with related work? Is the difference with related work important enough?
>
> How hard is the paper?
>
>
>
It depends on what you mean by "hard". If I read a paper where everything seems obvious/trivial, then I might question the actual contribution of the paper (and I'm talking about obvious/trivial here, i.e., where every result in the paper does need any justification). Of course, a paper can be extremely simple and elegant, and be a very powerful contribution.
On the other hand, if I can't understand the results of the paper, then I'm probably not the right reviewer for this paper.
>
> Generality and extension of the results.
>
>
>
Can I reuse the results of the paper for something else? Are the simplifications/assumptions of the authors reasonable?
>
> Is it an interesting topic?
>
>
>
Did the authors make a good case to motivate their contribution? Am I personally interested in this topic?
There are of course many other aspects to take into account. Personally, the only difference I make when reviewing a paper for a top-conference compared to a small workshop, is that in the latter case, I understand that "the authors leave that aspect for future work" more often. The other different is the threshold: for FOCS 2012, [169 papers were *rejected*](http://www.lamsade.dauphine.fr/~sikora/ratio/confs.php). So, if I classify a paper as a "weak accept" for a small workshop, it might passes, whereas the competition might be much tougher for a top-conference.
Just write the best paper you possibly can within the deadline, and don't think "hum, this level should be enough": if you can improve it, do so!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> What's the expected level of paper to be submitted to top level conferences in theoritical computer science (FOCS/SODA/STOC)?
>
>
>
**Top. The top level.**
My experience on program committees for STOC, FOCS, ITCS, SODA, SOCG, etc., is that there are ***FAR*** more submissions of publishable quality than can be accepted into the conference. By "publishable quality" I mean a well-written presentation of a novel, interesting, and non-trivial result within the scope of the conference.
For example, I was on the STOC 2013 program committee. We accepted 99 out of 361 submissions. Program committee members were specifically instructed to limit the top rating to only the top 20% of the papers we reviewed; at least for me, that meant some *very* hard choices. Most of the discussion in the last week of the review cycle revolved around papers that were clearly very strong, but were not obviously "competitive" with other papers that were already accepted.
There are several questions that come up over and over in the FOCS/STOC review cycle:
* How surprising / novel / elegant / interesting is the result?
* How surprising / novel / elegant / interesting / general are the techniques?
* How technically difficult is the result? Ironically, FOCS and STOC committees have a reputation for ignoring the distinction between *trivial* (easy to derive from scratch) and *nondeterministically trivial* (easy to understand after the fact).
* What is the expected *impact* of this result? Is this paper going to change the way people do theoretical computer science over the next five years?
* Is the result of general interest to the theoretical computer science community? Or is it only of interest to a narrow subcommunity? In particular, if the topic is outside the STOC/FOCS mainstream—say, for example, computational topology—does the paper do a good job of explaining and motivating the results *to a typical STOC/FOCS audience*?
As a general rule, for a paper to be accepted to STOC/FOCS, at least one person on the program committee must be willing to pound on the table and *demand* that the paper is accepted, with strong answers to all these questions. Which means that as a minimum, *the authors* must have compelling answers to all these questions, even if professional modesty forbids writing those answers into the paper.
Specific criteria vary between different conferences, and not only because of the obvious differences in topical coverage. A well-written paper that combines existing techniques is a surprising way to obtain an elegant proof of a novel and interesting result, but does not introduce new techniques or require much technical sophistication, is much more likely to be accepted at SODA than at STOC or FOCS. (I've seen more than one paper rejected from STOC and accepted to SODA with precisely that review summary at both conferences.) ITCS favors conceptual contributions — new approaches, new models, new problem areas — over technical difficulty.
But at its core, conference reviewing is a random process. (As <NAME> put it: "...whose expectation depends on the submissions, and whose variance depends on the program committee.") Every submission is a gamble. Your chances of winning the lottery may be small, but they're infinitely larger if you actually buy a ticket than if you don't.
* Write the best papers you can.
* Keep your target audience in mind when you write.
* Especially if you're submitting to a conference for the first time, get feedback on your paper from a community expert well before you submit.
* If you believe you have a *reasonable* chance of acceptance, submit it. Be respectful but brutally honest with yourself. Do not listen to the Impostor Syndrome.
* Regardless of the outcome, take reviews and other feedback seriously. Don't just revise your paper; also revise your writing habits *and your mental model of the audience* for future submissions.
* Rejection is not the end of the world. It's only one paper; you'll write dozens more.
>
> Actually someone can try to send the paper to the FOCS/SODA/STOC and see if is rejected then send it to some other conferences, but IMHO this is not appreciated.
>
>
>
It's a bit more subtle than that. Submitting a paper that *might* get in is fine. What PCs really don't like is being asked to review submissions that are clearly below threshold, especially papers that were previously submitted to comparable conferences but were not updated to respond to previous reviews. (Even when a paper is submitted to several different conferences, it's not uncommon to have overlapping sets of reviewers. I've been asked to review four different submissions of the same paper.)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/02 | 5,586 | 22,561 | <issue_start>username_0: The essential gist of my question relates to what the real, unvarnished realities are of graduate, post-graduate, research, fellowship, and professorship attainment - *when you aren't a single person with no pressing demands other than feeding yourself*.
[**EDIT**: *I am humbled by the incredibly helpful and thoughtful responses so far, all of which are +1 from me. I'll leave the question open a few more days before clicking 'accept' on any one, but you all have my gratitude and I hope others will benefit anywhere near as much as I have.* ]
**What I don't know** is what succeeding in this path truly requires in time committment and family support.
Right now I can handle a 12-14 credit course schedule with 3.7-4.0 GPA (in the top 5-10% for college and program, dean's list, etc), work part-time, and still have time to be home and not have a burn-out/breakdown - and the academics are the easy part by far! I could do more, but I need to work more too.
**What I really need to know** is how sharply different is the time/dedication curve of graduate work and above. I realize each step is a filter that removes most of the entrants (most people don't get a degree, most who do don't attend/finish graduate school, most who do don't seek a PhD, most who do don't seek/gain professorship...and on and on). But I don't know how severe the stepping is - I'm not talking "tenured professor at MIT or bust" - I realize that bar is many orders of magnitude higher.
**Background Details:** As an "adult, returning" undergraduate student with a (disabled) wife and kids, I'm halfway through a bachelor degree now. I've located a field of study (in a focus of Industrial Engineering) that has made me very interested in altering my life path to include seeking a Masters and maybe even a PhD/professorship (my father was a professor, so its not a purely novel concept to me). I've met and spoken with my advisor and 2 other professors with experience in related fields, and all is encouraging; I have a graduate school in mind, I've received lots of great advice on preparing for school (on this forum and in person), I test well (no GRE fears remain), good grades/class rank, good prospects for future strong referal letters, etc - a comparitively charmed existence for which I am very grateful! I just have to investigate whether I can make it through with an intact, cared for family!
Any guidance you could provide me, and other aspiring "non-traditional" students alike, would be appreciated immensely - thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: I cannot resist the urge to answer this question or at least provide some insights based on my experience.
I am an adult and married with two kids, both of them born during my candidature. I work full-time in a high pressure advocacy company. I have been in my adopted country for less than 10 years (so that brings the question of settling in, finding your way around etc.) To cap it all, English is my fourth language.
I completed my PhD on a part-time basis and I have now graduated. The key is to enjoy what you do, so choose a topic that grabs your attention. There are long and lonely periods of solitary work and unless you like what you do, you will never get through.
Look after your family and fit your studies around their needs. This may mean not starting your study until after 9 pm when the kids are in bed.
Enjoy the little things in life, like going to the park and spending some quality time with your family. You still have a life even if you are studying.
If your study relates to your work, it makes things a lot easier as you can continually think about what you need to do and when it comes down to studying, you can start with a bang.
Adapt. Go to your work an hour early and leave an hour late so that you can use that time for studying. If you have one hour lunch, take a nap to compensate for your sleepless nights!
Have a supportive supervisor. Do not be afraid to make non-traditioanl arrangements. Instead of going to the university (which was 3 hours drive from my workplace), I found that my supervisor made weekly visits to a place near my home (to visit a relative). So I offered to have coffee with him every now and then.
Be kind to your self and careful of your self talk. Give yourself a break or a reward or whatever motivates you. If you don't feel like studying, make a conscious decision and spend the same time with the family. In this way, you will not have regrets.
Finally, don't lose sight of your end goal which is completion of your study.
So yes, it is possible and even though the reality is harsh, it is worth it!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Javeer has provided a great answer. I did a little searching around for any studies that might address pursuing an advanced graduate degree while supporting a family, but I was unsuccessful (and if there aren't any, it sounds like low-lying fruit for a budding social scientist!).
You might consider checking out the lively discussion on the Chronicle of Higher Education Forums: [Having a baby while in a PhD program](http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php?topic=81697.0).
When I was in graduate school, one of my Electrical Engineering professors with a wife and three children had a strict 9am-5pm policy, which he had apparently also kept during his PhD studies at MIT (though I do recall him telling stories about all-nighters the day tape-outs were due, so it couldn't have been set in concrete!). Bear in mind, he is also the most efficient person I have ever met, and when he was at work he was **at work**. I never once saw him dilly-dallying around, and for every hour that us graduate students put into real work, he probably put in three times as much.
So, I know it is doable for the right person, but it almost certainly takes an extremely high level of concentration while at work to pull it off successfully.
p.s. To address your actual question, I found that graduate school work comes in stages (at least in the U.S., and for me):
* First, you have a number of hard classes, which takes most of your time, but not more than undergraduate school (except for the projects...). If you get an advisor early, you may start research immediately, or at least have other duties such as reviewing papers, and, of course you may have TA responsibilities. You're definitely busier than in undergraduate school altogether.
* Once you finish your classes, research really takes over, and the work can come in spurts, especially around the time conference and journal submissions are due. I've seen graduate students disappear for weeks at a time, and they don't seem too harmed by it in the end. Keep in mind that summers will be taken up by research or internships, too, so you don't have much of a break (although academia definitely slows down to some extent during summer, with lots of people out of the office).
* The spurts continue until you really get down to writing your dissertation, which is a constant weight that you could spend every hour working on. I got some reprieve when I sent my advisor chapter updates (and you have to take breaks for sanity), but there is always that next chapter to work on, or the bibliography to fix up, or the figures to modify, or the defense presentation to practice. It can be a rough time for many students, just because your dissertation can seem like the Eye of Sauron looming in the distance. This is probably the time where you need to tell your family that Dad might be more stressed than normal.
* The few (possibly longer) weeks after you graduate are some of the most relaxing days of your life. :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I feel for once I am somewhat qualified to give an answer here.
A bit of background to know where I am coming from and hopefully give some insight to my situation. I am currently finishing my second year in a MA Mathematics program and beginning my first year of my Ph.D. in Mathematics in the fall. I am married with two children(a 3 year old and an 8 month old). I had my first child during undergrad and my second child came two weeks before the current school year started. I attend a smaller department that is most certainly less intensive in regards to the expectations that another school would have(such as a top tier research university). I've been a Research Assistant for the past two years doing active and successful research with an amazing supervisor. This past year has been the most stressful since I decided to take three core year long sequences, which is a great deal of work to keep up with.
**Above all, put your family first**.
-------------------------------------
I would hope this goes without saying, but it can be easy to lose sight of this when you're up to your neck in homework/deadlines. When something comes up with my family, I drop my schoolwork to deal with it. I make it a point to always put my family before school. I'm sure there are professors out there who would argue otherwise, but I'm grateful that my professors seem to (hopefully) understand the situation and that I just can't put in the hours that other students can. I generally score lower on average than other students but I think I do fairly well. Could I do better? Absolutely...if I were to put in the hours and sacrifice time with my family I could score better on my tests and homework, but that isn't what really matters in the long term to me. Of course I want to do well in school(and I generally do!), but sometimes I have to make a choice and school gets the axe.
In the end, you choose your own priorities, and I would suggest opting for spending time with your family over finishing that HW. You just can't get those moments back.
Having a Strong Support System
------------------------------
I would **absolutely not** be able to do this without the support of my wife, family, and friends. Without my wife to help out with the kids and pick up some extra housework when studying for tests/finals/my oral MA exam, I would certainly have dropped out or (worse) ruined my marriage or become a terrible father. I make sure to try and do extra work whenever the stressful times pass and try to make it up to her as I can.
We are lucky to have family close that can help out with childcare and babysitting when I need to go in on an off day or want to stay late for a seminar. Without the support system we have in place, I'm not sure I could physically do it. If you have a similar support system, then it will be a huge relief to your stressed.
I should also mention that without some amazing people at my department, I wouldn't be able to succeed. Professors have been amazing with deadlines if the time just wasn't there for me some week. My RA supervisor has been absolutely amazing as well. She's extremely understanding with the kids and even being cool with me bringing the little one to meetings if everything just fell apart for that day. If I had a less understanding supervisor, I probably wouldn't have made it.
Time Management
---------------
This is probably the trickiest part. Time management is always important, but it's extremely important to successful manage school and family. You just don't have all the time that other students do so when it's time to work you need to remove all distractions and get as much done as possible. I arrive at school between 8-9am and in between classes I work nonstop on homework or studying until I leave at 3-4pm. I have a computer in my office, but I purposely keep it off unless I absolutely need it on. I disable the wifi on my smartphone and removed nearly all the time wasting apps(facebook, games, etc..). I check my e-mail probably twice, once near the beginning of the day and once around the time I'm getting ready to leave for the day.
I do take small breaks from work to socialize with other students or check in with professors as needed, but I strive to make sure that I don't waste an hour doing absolutely nothing in someone else's office. Socializing is an important part of graduate school, so don't neglect it but don't let it consume all your precious time.
When I come home after school I shut off school mode. I spend the rest of the night with my family, eat dinner, and help get the kids into bed. Once the kids are in bed then I'm free to do homework. I don't always go straight into homework though because it's important to me to spend time with my wife relaxing and watching an episode or two of TV shows to wind down. It doesn't happen every night, but I usually make an effort to take it easy on weeknights when I don't have school the next day. The "school nights" I usually retire upstairs to work on homework. I'll work until midnight or later depending on how early I have to get up and I'll average around 6 hours of sleep. It's not great, but sacrifices have to be made somewhere.
Finally, in my opinion, **give yourself the weekend**. Once I leave school on Friday, I'm done with math until at least Sunday night. The weekends are prime family time and we spend every weekend visiting the zoo, science center, art museum, the park, or virtually anything else the kids would enjoy. I initially thought it would be impossible to take the entire weekend off schoolwork and still succeed, but I've been doing it for 2 years. This past year was the worst, but I stuck to it and I can safely say I managed to survive it and do just fine in my courses.
Dealing with Stress
-------------------
Let's face it, you'll be stressed. Grad school is stressful as all hell to begin with, but then you go and toss kids into the mix? It's insanity, and you have to handle it somehow. I'm a fan of exercise, which takes up that precious time but is totally worth it. You have to feel as good as you can and any sort of activity is a great way to relieve stress. You could also do another hobby, or something that you do to relax. I'm also an avid reader, so losing myself into a book every now and then is great. The time I have to read varies, but it's one of my top hobbies. Find something you enjoy and do it frequently to relax.
Sometimes it just can't be helped. If you find yourself *really* freaking out, you really should seek out the school's counseling center. They are no doubt used to overworked students and having a place to lay all your problems on the table and have a trained therapist help you sort it out is probably exactly what you need.
---
To sum it up, I put my family before everything else. School takes a high priority but there are far more important things in my life than getting an A in every course. Schedule your time wisely, remove distractions, and work when it's time to work. Do something relaxing for yourself on a regular basis. Give your family the attention and time they deserve. You can't get those moments back and no letter grade in the world is worth that sacrifice.
**Above all, make sure you are happy.** It's such a small thing but I've seen students absolutely miserable hating what they are doing. *Don't be that person*! Life is too short to waste it being miserable. I suggest every 6 months or so, take a step back and evaluate how you feel about your situation(this should apply to anyone, not just graduate students). For instance, I vow to myself that if there ever comes a time when I begin to genuinely dislike what I'm doing, I will quit and find something else.
Good luck and don't forget what's really important. Grad school has a way of giving you tunnel vision and destroying you emotionally...just don't let it do it too often. :)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Getting excited about a field of study is a great intrinsic motivator. But, as a grown-up, you know that the things that get your children excited (ice cream?) may have side effects (sugar rush that the parents have to manage? longer-term obesity risks?). So unlike a 20-something out of undergrad who can afford spending a few more years in school, you have a different perspective on what works in your life, and how things *should* work. While it may be true that Ph.D.s pay better, if you are say in your mid-40s, it is not entirely clear if the 5-7 years you will spend on the program with an income of $15-20K (losing $50-60K opportunities) are worth the gain from $50K to $80K that you will only enjoy for about 15 years. Having a better mid-age income may be especially important to get your kids through college (unless you really get a professor job with accompanying discounts; that's probably 10-15 years down the road for you, and may be worth factoring in.) You must realize that few research schools will hire Ph.D.s of age to tenure-track positions -- by being burdened with a family, you are putting yourself at a disadvantage of not being able to put 100+ hour work weeks like single fresh Ph.D.s in their late 20s would be able to (or ship your kids to China to be brought up by grandparents, as some married profs can do). An example of an MIT grad with a strict schedule that Chris gave is terrific, but is likely to be an exception; in some places, if you try to pull something like this, you will be asked [to correct your work ethics](http://www.lettersofnote.com/2011/03/i-expect-you-to-correct-your-work-ethic.html).
Talking to professors is all fine -- they all will be very happy to see you go in grad school, get a Ph.D. and become one more professor (more so important if we are talking about a country native working on an STEM field; you have seen all sorts of discussions of how bad the shortage of STEM qualified personnel is in the US -- I assume we are talking about US here by your references to MIT :) ). To put it differently, they will want *you* to become one of *them*, and frankly I would not expect any different answer. Keep in mind that they are the success stories, at least in the sense of academia. To balance things out, find a few Ph.D. working in industry in your designated field (industrial engineering, heh?), and ask them (i) if the degree really helps in their jobs; (ii) if the degree was necessary to propel them to where they are (things are changing here: you must have a Ph.D. to hold some of the higher positions, and you hit a glass ceiling at some point with lower degrees); (iii) why they went to industry rather than academia.
When I taught at a university, I used to have a much greater respect for adult learners in my classes than for the "mainstream" students. These students are way more focused and have a much better idea of why they are in college, to begin with, and what they are going to do with their degree. They obviously have better social skills, which is important in every walk of life, and more so in engineering which is traditionally considered a nerdish discipline. You would want to play to these advantages that you have over the teenagers surrounding you in your classes.
As a matter of qualifications for this particular question: my wife and I came to do our Ph.D. programs with a 1-year old son, and we had another daughter the year before the job market. My wifeis a tenured professor now, I work in industry, and have a great degree of skepticism about academia, as you can easily tell :).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I can share my personal experience as it relates to your question. I am 42 years old and hav decided to return to the world of academia to pursue a PhD in Computational Science part-time after earning my BS twenty years ago in Computer Science and Math. My wife and I have been married twenty years and we have four children ranging in age from six to eighteen (the oldest is actually starting college in the fall at the same college I am attending). Oh yeah, I have a full time management job.
As the other posters have commented, time management is a must. It takes a lot of planning; we had to work out a schedule of who is going to bathe at what time, what time dinner is, what time each child gets help with homework, and so on. And as one person mentioned, it means not starting your class work until the family tasks are dealt with - even if it is 10 PM!
I am still in graduate school, but have a few real world bits of advice to share.
1. Research your program's requirements on completion time and lay out your class schedule ahead of time. We had to submit a proposed course of study at the beginning. Our program had a time limit of ten years, and I paced myself to finish in seven. This leaves a few years of breathing room.
2. Look for any residency requirements. The program I am in requires two consecutive semesters "in residency". Basically you have to take a full course load (nine hours) for two semesters. My plan is to do those with my Dissertation hours.
3. Find a good advisor who has a schedule that works with yours.
4. Honestly I have found the coursework easier overall. This might be a maturity factor and not procrastinating as much as I did as an undergrad.
5. Talk to your employer. My boss is pretty understanding, and I can deal with a lot of work-related tasks in the evening. This gives me the freedom to go to campus to deal with homework and projects.
6. Don't forget your family! Sometimes you have to make sacrifices, and it is easy to cut family time in order to finish an assignment. This is okay every once in a while but do not make it a habit! Don't forget to bring your wife flowers and tell her thank you for putting up with your late nights.
7. Talk to your instructors. Tell them about your situation. I was pleasantly surprised by how understanding they are when I needed to turn an assignment in late because I had to go out of town for business or when I skipped class to take a child to the doctor.
8. Involve your family! There are numerous family oriented activities on our campus, and the kids enjoy going to campus and seeing where you go to class, do research, etc. Let them meet some of your professors. Our campus has a movie theater and a Dunkin Donuts - two instant wins for my kids! My wife enjoys walking around campus and reminiscing about our years as undergrads and showing the kids where we went when we lived there.
9. Take advantage of every second of spare time. Going on a trip? Take a paper to read or notes to study. My two youngest kids love going to McDonald's to play on the indoor playground when the weather is bad outside. I carry my laptop and work on homework or research. Sometimes you also need to find a few minutes just to relax!
I hope this bit of insight helps! Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/02 | 1,704 | 7,094 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student in physics, and I sometimes tutor undergrads in introductory physics classes on the side. Now, there's widespread agreement among people who teach or tutor physics that the only way to effectively learn the material is to *use* it, generally by working through practice problems in homework assignments and sample exams.
But recently I was contacted by a student who was interested in "tutoring," where by use of the quotes I mean that what she wanted was for *me* to do problems, and she would watch and ask questions when she was confused about something. At one point this student wrote a long email full of what seemed like psychological mumbo-jumbo trying to justify her assertion that she actually learns that way, and that the normal method of having *her* do the work would not be effective. I didn't believe it (thus I declined the tutoring assignment), but was I wrong? Are there actually students who don't learn by doing the work, and for whom it *is* a more effective strategy to just show them how to go through a problem? I would definitely appreciate pointers to educational psychology research on the matter, if anyone knows of any.
Note that I'm not talking about how to teach a topic for the first time, to a group of students who have never seen it before. In that case I know a bit of demonstration is necessary. The situation I'm asking about is reviewing for a final exam, where the student would (or should) have already learned the material in class and completed a homework assignment or two on it.<issue_comment>username_1: I am not an expert in cognitive science or psychology but I have a few years of teaching assistant experience behind me so I will have a go at this one and I suspect that a few others might even agree with me.
My general roles are in leading discussion sections and in lab sessions (information science: so combination of coding and data analysis in context with social science literature)
Now learning by watching aka [observational learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_learning) is not a [new](http://psuc0e.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/learning-by-watching/) concept. Scientists have been studying this for a long, long time. However, note the example literature cited in the previous links. There is a marked difference in learning how to strike a [Bobo doll](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobo_doll_experiment) and acquiring a complex [skill](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skill) such as deriving [Newton Law's of Motion](http://www.ehow.com/how_7804623_derive-newtons-laws-motion.html)
Having laid all of this expository work, I would like to argue that personally, I **believe** that observational learning exists and happens in the natural world around us. I just don't believe that one can acquire complex mathematical notions and concepts just by observing (unless this girl is some sort of a savant).
I think that this student was just trying to make you do her homework problems for her.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have done almost all of my math learning so far this way. Consequently, I know a whole lot of math and I know a whole lot *about* a lot of areas of math, but I suck at proving things, and my knowledge isn't terribly deep. Thankfully, I am finally going to be taking some pure math courses where I will have to prove things and develop my skills.
Less generally, I think that one can learn facts and knowledge and problem solving strategies by watching, but they will not develop skills. For that they need practice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the student is reasonable, up to a point, then she is unreasonable.
When tutoring a student (teaching of any kind, really), you should give some examples in order to give her the key information she will need in order to do the work which will be expected of her. However, after you have covered the key points, which includes showing her how to work through a problem or two (or three, depending on the situation) then you must assess her learning (and your teaching).
The natural way to assess is to have her produce, for example by solving problems. If she only wants to watch you and does not want to produce then it seems she is not interested in you assessing her and she is not interested in assessing herself. I would not start (or continue) tutoring this kind of student.
So, yes, perhaps she does learn best that way...but part of the educator's job is to see if the education is actually taking hold and the only way to do that is to have the student produce something.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If one were to wager, the smart money is that it's a con. However, in principle, an exceptional person certainly does not need to be subjected to the orthodox fake-rigor fake-serious pretense. That is, a person with some natural talent catches on very, very, very quickly, while other kids are effectively resisting and thinking of something else anyway.
By this point in my life, I am inclined to give people a chance to "be talented", rather than to doubt that they are, even while I might privately bet against their self-estimate or pretense. After all, letting a few people "game" the system while we treat serious people well is better than brutally policing everything, crushing sincere talented people, just to be sure that no one "gets more credit than they deserve".
Btw, I think it's not about "learning styles", but about degree of engagement, optimistically. (Or else it is a con, but it's better for all of us to try to believe it's not...)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I would like to provide another perspective to this question; regardless whether or not the student is trying to fool you into doing her work for her, you can take a look at it from a practical perspective.
You (=tutor) are required to teach to her (=stuent) and presumably to many others like her. Likewise you are expected to read articles and do research. I would even argue that your primary task is to do research, not to teach undergrads. So, while your responsibilities are to prepare material and give lectures etc, their responsibility is to go through the material and do the work (hw/assignments). Given that you provide enough examples during the lectures, I don't see why you should go through the review or homework assignments for the student(s).
After all it's probably not feasible (time) or reasonable for you to do all that. Are you going to have individual sessions for every single student, so that their thoughts don't get disturbed by others who might ask questions? A compromise could be to hold *one* lecture where you solve old exam questions for the whole class. Our calculus teachers used to do that. THey would take an old exam, and solve each question, explaining as they go.
I am all for helping people with special needs (hearing aids, dyslexia etc) but *"I don't want to do the homework assignments, you do them for me and I watch you solve them"* is not a special need, it's good old laziness.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/02 | 2,099 | 8,971 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in my 4th year of PhD. Few months ago I presented my thesis proposal which already included some of the results (that are actually published). I proposed to add another chapter (call it Chapter x).
One of the committee members told me that the results presented are sufficient for a thesis. He said that chapter x is not necessary, or it can be replaced by a literature survey (instead of presenting original work - as I proposed during the thesis proposal). He said that original work can be done during a post-doc instead. My thesis supervisor agreed.
Right now, I am in the middle of of the Chapter x [and some other stuff] (and I think I have original results that are not complete - they would be complete, if everything goes fine [which is never the case in research]).
*My question is:* should I write my thesis without novel results in Chapter x and then do a postdoc based on Chapter x ? Or: should I continue working on Chapter x even if this will result in a longer PhD ?
*The source of my confusion:*
Wouldn't adding novel results in Chapter x improve my research CV ? but at the same time, will the long period of PhD negatively affect the research CV ? Plus, will I find the chance to work on this topic as a postdoc !<issue_comment>username_1: As a grad student myself, I can't be entirely sure, but I would look at it like this: based on the information you've given, it sounds like the only significant difference between the two options is whether this new research is part of your PhD thesis or not. In the long term, I don't think it will matter. The project will show up on your research CV either way, whether you do it as a PhD student or as a postdoc.
But if you choose to do it as a postdoc, then you will be partway through a postdoc in, say, two years, whereas if you choose to do your research as part of the PhD, you will not yet be a postdoc in two years. All other things being equal - and I think they are in this case - I would think it is better to advance through the stages of your career (PhD, postdoc, professorship) more quickly. By this logic, you should go with your committee's recommendation and omit this project from your thesis.
I have also read things which suggest that completing a PhD more quickly is correlated with greater academic success later in life, although I can't remember a link to give you. I'm not even sure it matters, though, since there isn't necessarily a causal relationship.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I've known of a few cases of people prolonging their Ph.Ds to improve their CVs.
I have spoken with professors and students who "felt their students had not published enough" and held them longer to ensure that their CVs would be strong enough so that someone would hire them for a postdoc or a faculty position - the reasoning being that if someone zips through their Ph.D in a few years but doesn't have enough work on their CV, then that student is going to be damned as far as an academic career goes.
Thus, one thing to ask yourself is if that work you're doing for your dissertation will eventually become a paper that might have some impact. In other words, if you write about this in your dissertation, will you eventually publish it?
Also, as part of your academic "development" so to speak, you should have a good idea of how much is "enough" as well, and that is to know what is "important" and what is not. In your stated case, maybe X isn't that important of a research gap if both of them think that you can investigate it with related work instead of doing research work to that end.
Another possible reason that it's mentioned as not being necessary is because they both feel that it will take much, much longer (in other words, the investment isn't worth the reward). Or, if the results merely incremental, they may not be enough of an improvement to warrant a new publication.
I realize that this isn't an answer and it's more of "things to consider" but I hope it helps you eventually come to a decision.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As username_2 suggests, prolonging the PhD to improve your research track record is a standard strategy, especially for students who are interested in pursuing an academic career.
**The minimal requirements to get a PhD are fundamentally weaker than the minimal requirements to get an academic job.** Despite all high-falutin' talk to the contrary, the only *real* requirement for completing a PhD is convincing your thesis committee to sign the requisite paperwork. Most faculty have an image in their heads of the necessary work; for example, in computer science, a minimal PhD thesis is roughly equivalent to two solid conference papers.
On the other hand, the academic job market is a true competition. Only people with truly outstanding research records (and strong recommendation letters) get invited to interview for faculty positions, or accepted for research postdoc positions. It doesn't matter whether you're "good enough"; lots of people are "good enough". What matters is how you compare against other people on the market. So it's actually quite rational to delay completing the PhD past the point where you have a viable thesis, in order to improve your research record.
That said, phrasing the delay in terms of "making your thesis stronger" is totally missing the point. **Your PhD thesis is an administrative hurdle.** At least in computer science, if you're lucky, three people will *ever* read your thesis, including you and your advisor. (The standard joke ends "...and your mom.") Your colleagues will see and judge your track record through your peer-reviewed publications in conferences and journals.
So, the short answer is: **Do more original publishable research, and then publish it.** And then I guess you could show off to your committee by including those results in your thesis, but whatever.
Also, please slap your advisor for me.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: There are a lot of details left unmentioned in your psot:
* How many papers have you *already* published? Is it only the three chapters of the thesis?
* How long would you extend your PhD program to add the additional work?
* How many publications or conference papers would you get out of this work?
If you already have four or five major publications after four years, then prolonging your stay for, as an example, two years for one paper might not be worth the time. However, if you only had to extend a year to get two or more publications, and you *know* that they will be accepted into top conferences or journals, then it would well behoove you to take the extra time.
However, there might be other reasons behind the sudden change in attitude. Do you know how the remaining time would be financed? Is it clear that your advisor would be able or willing to support you for the remaining time you'd want to spend?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Just do what your advisors told you. They are going to grade you anyway and give you letters of recommendation. Why would you want to do something different after already asking for what you are proposing? Would you want to annoy them just to get more material in your dissertation. Do you think it actually advances your career opportunities?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm a bit late adding this, but another reasonable option is: let the market decide for you.
Apply for postdocs this year, based on the research you have already finished. If you get offered something good, then write up your current results and defend. If you don't, then spend another year in grad school improving your research, and hopefully you'll be in a better position to reapply then.
Of course, you'll want to have your advisor on board with this plan, and make sure you have funding available for the extra year.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Let the market decide. If your results are ready when the job market comes along then your adviser can feature them prominently in his/her letter, whether or not it's a part of your thesis. You can complete the high quality work as a post-doc as well. If your adviser can see that your chapter-x has potential then so can the professors in schools trying to hire you.
Staying in school a year longer only makes sense if it will significantly impact how you are valued by the market and if it enables you to significantly improve your portfolio of working papers. Your committee member's comment that "original work can be done in post-doc.." makes me think that he/she was being euphemistic and was perhaps worried that you maybe be trying to delay facing some harsh job market truths in the guise of doing "original" "chapter-x" stuff .. if everything goes fine "which is never the case in research".
The point of a thesis is to get a job to enable you to contribute in research. If your current thesis gets you a job then move on and don't look back.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/02 | 1,107 | 4,406 | <issue_start>username_0: Other than the possibility of waiving registration fees, What is the objective of graduate students volunteering at conferences?
For instance, I am considering volunteering at [IJCAI](http://ijcai13.org/students_mentoring/volunteers) these days and wish to do it at least once (never done it before) but do not really have a clear motivation for it.<issue_comment>username_1: **tl;dr** No registration fees, networking and attending relevant sessions.
There has been some talk and background informationabout this already. See [this](http://s2013.siggraph.org/volunteers/student-volunteers), [this](http://chi2013.acm.org/organizers/student-volunteers/), [this](http://2013.icse-conferences.org/content/student-volunteers-0) and [this](http://sc13.supercomputing.org/content/student-volunteers) for some background. With this background, IMHO, the primary reasons why PhD students should be volunteers for major conferences in their line at least once are:
1. First up, no registration fees. Yay ! Primary reason one.
2. Networking with other PhD student volunteers who are likely to be PhD students in similar departments working on similar stuff. For instance, most student volunteers at CHI 2013 are PhD students from HCI/CS/IS/ischools working on HCI stuff. Its great to meet with peers and bond with them. [Yay for student volunteer party !]
3. Possible networking with relevant faculty. This could be someone from the organizing committee or the program committee or someone else who you come in close contact with for the duration of the conference. There might be a certain someone who is a good researcher in your line and whom you might want to keep in touch with in the future. Getting in touch as a student volunteer in a conference might be one such strategy.
4. Picking and choosing conference sessions/tracks to attend. You could, with some dexterity be the student volunteer in charge of a track or a session or a panel which you are really really interested in watching. As a student volunteer pretty much, you stand and assist and you do get one of the best seats in the house, albeit by standing. :)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Again, this is one of those things that might be different from conference to conference, but in the ones that I frequent, here's how it works:
* Only local students, in particular, students from the local organizer's university (if there's more than 1 university in the city) get to volunteer. It's not that others are barred, but just that the email gets circulated within the department. If you manage to hear about it and contact the organizers, then you can be a part too.
* You agree to be a room help/PA support/IT support/etc. for different sessions. If you're interested in the sessions, you get to pick and choose which ones you want to go to (i.e., you can help out at a session you were going to attend anyway).
* The best part — you get paid `$minimum_wage_in_state` for the hours you work. That meant that if you managed to pitch in 3-4 hours/day for a 5 day conference, you get something like 120-150 bucks for attending something that you like. Considering that PhD pay (in the US) is only a little above minimum wage and that local students don't get per diem compensation, this is not a bad proposition at all.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Volunteering can be fun, it's a change, you get to meet new people. Volunteering is good for you - you feel a part of something bigger, and like you've achieved something useful and immediate (unlike, say, a thesis or a paper).
It's probably good for your career in the long term - getting a reputation as a person who says "Yes" to things is always going to help.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: From the IJCAI link you provided, I found the following on the travel grant application web page,
>
> In the event that travel grant applications exceed available funds, preference will be given to students who have an accepted technical paper, and **then to students who are actively participating in the conference in some way**.
>
>
>
I take it to mean that you have more chances to get the grant if you volunteer.
Send the application form now before it's too late if you did not get support from your department and you don't have an accepted paper. I would run to register for volunteering if I were you.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/05/03 | 1,269 | 4,877 | <issue_start>username_0: Teachers in primary and secondary school usually are called as Mr.[surname] or Miss/Mrs.[surname]. However, cases in universities are more complex. It seems we need to call a teacher who is a professor professor or prof.[surname], and a teacher who is not a professor but a doctor Dr.[surname]. But not all teachers are professors, so what about
1)one whose name we know but neither a professor or a doctor?
2)one whose name we know but we do not know whether he/she is a professor or a doctor?
3)one whose name we do not know?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Mr/Ms
2. Why not ask what they prefer to be called?
3. Again, ask them.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Within an academic setting while you might run into a Dean or a Duke, generally Professor is the highest honorific you will need. Therefore, I suggest calling everyone you do not know Professor. If they are not a Professor, or do not want to be called Professor, they will correct you. It seems to me to be a lot less pompous to say "actually, I am only a doctor", then it is to say "actually, I am a Professor/Dean/Duchess/King".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Everywhere I've attended and worked in Britain, I've called teachers by their first name and been called my first name.
It also depends on what you mean by a college. Most universities are not called college (and if they are going to, say, Birkbeck College, one would say one is going to university. Most colleges are technical colleges, or colleges of further education (I've attended or taught at [http://www.burton-college.ac.uk/](http://www.burton-college.ac.uk/%E2%80%8E), <http://www.nulc.ac.uk/>, <http://www.southstaffs.ac.uk/>), which have no professors, and few staff with PhDs - although there are also colleges of higher education which would have professors and where most staff would have PhDs (but most of these have become universities).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Here's an answer based on my experience in the United States. I don't know how well it generalizes to other countries, but some issues may be similar.
You can't go wrong calling someone Professor or Doctor unless you know for sure that it is inappropriate and they know that you know.
At the college level in the U.S., it's common to refer to your teacher as Professor X regardless of whether their official job title includes the word professor. (The primary teacher of a college course is considered to be acting as a professor for that purpose, even if their official title is visiting scholar or postdoctoral associate or whatever.) This may not apply to grad students, but it can cover just about everyone else.
When possible I'd avoid gendered titles like Mr. or Ms., and specifically Ms. The issue is subconscious sexism: some people tend to use fancier titles to address men than to address women in comparable positions, and calling someone Ms. may make her wonder whether you are one of those people. (If you are such a person, then you should mend your ways, and even if you're not you could still be mistaken for one.)
On the other hand, Miss and Mrs. are far worse than Ms., because they indicate marital status. You should never address an academic as Miss or Mrs. unless she has explicitly indicated that this is what she prefers.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: In the UK a professor is higher status than a Dr. and not nearly as common So a Dr. won't be offended but they might be snippy about the lack of local knowledge about them if get that wrong.
I spent a while worrying about this when I first got to university as it seemed like a minefield. With that in mind I can tell you UK universities usually list the staff on their websites and often a Dr/Prof will have their own page which tells you all about them and their publications etc. So, you can usually find the answer to this without having to worry. Just in case though, I'll give you an answer for each one.
**1) one whose name we know but neither a professor or a doctor?**
Mr/Ms (Ms is best for women because it can offend someone if you assume anything about marital status when you don't know them)
(and sign off your mail 'Yours Sincerely,')
**2) one whose name we know but we do not know whether he/she is a professor or a doctor?**
In this case google is your friend. You will be able to find out. I would not advise emailing an academic to ask them for anything without first finding something out about them (or their research at least) first.
(and sign off your mail 'Yours Sincerely,')
**3) one whose name we do not know?**
Dear Sir or Madam (and sign off your mail 'Yours faithfully,')
In all three cases how they end their letter to you will tell you how you can relax. If they sign off as 'Jim', you can lose the formality (especially if that's not even their real name ;-))
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/03 | 537 | 1,791 | <issue_start>username_0: The problem is I completed a work earlier and did another work which extends this work. However, I haven't got the earlier work published. I plan to send these two papers to a conference but I do not know how to cite the work of first paper in second paper.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know or have information about the writing style or style guide that is usually followed in your field and you should follow those style guides to find out how to cite unpublished works .
To get you kickstarted in the right direction, I have provided information about the [APA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APA_style), [Chicago](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chicago_Manual_of_Style) and [MLA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_MLA_Style_Manual) styles and how to cite unpublished works. Of course, your field may use completely unrelated style guides but they should have typical information for unpublished works. See [this](http://linguistics.byu.edu/faculty/henrichsenl/apa/APA14.html), [this](http://nova.campusguides.com/content.php?pid=114919&sid=992797), [this](http://www.ehow.com/how_2315829_cite-unpublished-sources-chicago-manual.html) and [this](http://www.ehow.com/how_4450351_cite-unpublished-work-mla-format.html) for more information.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Many people, including myself, use the following style:
>
> Author. “Paper Title,” manuscript, year.
>
>
> e.g.:
> [13] A.N. Author, “Paper Citation Rules,” manuscript, 2013.
>
>
>
If it's your paper you can also cite it as
>
> Author. “Paper Title,” submitted, year.
>
>
>
The proper citation style may depend on the conference you submit your paper to. In my area, theoretical computer science, there are no strict citation rules.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/04 | 877 | 3,805 | <issue_start>username_0: We are a research group from some private university and we offer research contract services. The problem is that when we get customers, the contract is signed by the highest authority of the university, and we appear on the contract as second players. Also they get 20% on the budget, and all intellectual property that might come from our work. I do not know whether the same situation is in public universities, but we do not like this and we are thinking about other alternatives, for instance, since we have now a lot of potential customers and contacts, to sign the contracts through a smallest possible company that we would create, so that our university would never know about this. The problem is that with this approach, we can not hire people for working on the projects in our university, so they should work out of academia, and we would never get officially recognition for this work. So it seems we have only two options, we stay in this university and accept the situation, or we leave completely and create a spin-off. I would like to know your opinion or advice about this, or what would you do in our situation.<issue_comment>username_1: The situation you describe is fairly typical of research contracts—if you are employed at a university, then normally the university is the one that negotiates contracts on your behalf. This is usually for legal reasons, although it does, as you indicate, usually come at the cost of having to give the university some of the money in the contract as "overhead."
As you also indicated, however, it *is* possible to form a start-up company; there's nothing wrong with doing so in most countries, and such companies can engage in contract work with private firms. However, there are often restrictions on receiving government research awards unless they're partnered with universities or other approved non-profit organizations.
Some points to consider:
* How much of your business leads are the result of the identification of your group with your host university?
* Will you have enough outside business to support your staff through this outside research income?
* It is quite likely that much of what you save in overhead payments to your university may go out to your government in the form of taxes as well as to pay for other business expenses you have.
You *cannot* expect to run a company while on-campus, using university resources. If this is discovered, you can almost certainly expect to be terminated for misuse of university resources (and worse, possibly public resources as well, depending on what country you're in). At a minimum, you would expect to have to have off-campus resources, and employ your contract employees separately, if you want to maintain this arrangement.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Also they get 20% on the budget, and all intellectual property that
> might come from our work.
>
>
>
Only 20%, that is a dream rate, are you sure it is right? For research related activities from fedral agencies in the US 70% is not unheard of. See this table from [Harvard](http://osp.fad.harvard.edu/content/fa-cost-rates-federal-sponsors). Charitable foundations often get discounted [rates](http://osp.fad.harvard.edu/content/fa-cost-rates-non-federal-sponsors), while industry partners often have to pay extra. At my country university industry contracts usually carry at least a 100% overhead rate.
As for the IP, universities tend to be willing to let you give away the IP, they just want to make sure they get a cut if you try and make money on the IP. Whether or not the support the university puts in makes them a reasonable investor is a hard call. You have to make a business case to determine if you are better off going independently.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/04 | 628 | 2,622 | <issue_start>username_0: I have always wondered why a person is given the title of Dr after completing a PhD in a non-medical field. This is especially because of the confusion over the medical title of Dr. Why hasn't a better distinction been formulated by now?<issue_comment>username_1: It seems that the real question should be "why the title of doctor seems to be now more associated to medical sciences than other fields".
Doctor comes from doctum, that is a derivative of docere, Latin verb for "teaching".
The first doctors in the very first universities studied in four faculties: arts, medical sciences, law and theology. We still use PhD (Philosophiae doctor) but the meaning of the word philosophy has changed over the centuries. During the renaissance, the word philosophy had a broader meaning since philosophy at that time encompasses the whole spectrum of science.
In some countries (France for instance), it is forbidden to use the title of Dr for those who are not MD. In this case, Dr is a degree but not a title. Why do we not use MD everywhere instead of Dr (which seems to be the way to suppress the ambiguity while respecting history)? I don't know.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It's actually exactly the opposite: "doctor" is Latin for "teacher" and the title originally had no special connection with medicine. Instead, a doctor was anyone qualified to teach at a university (in medieval Europe teaching qualifications were typically determined by the church). The concept of a formal PhD degree came much later, but it continued this earlier terminology.
The confusion in English is irritating, but not problematic enough to make universities give up a 1000+ year old tradition. It's not clear why this situation arose. One natural explanation is that if you want to emphasize your medical skills, you can do it by explaining that you are not just a healer, but in fact someone qualified to teach other people the healing arts. In other words, you're a doctor of medicine in the academic sense of the word "doctor". Until very recently universities were fairly exotic, and most people didn't talk about academic doctors very much, so the medical usage was much more salient for the general public and for most people it became the standard meaning of "doctor".
Of course this difficulty with this story is that it doesn't explain why, for example, German does not confuse the terms the same way English does. Maybe it's just chance, or maybe there's some cultural reason.
In any case, though, academia had the title first and is reluctant to change it.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/05 | 7,426 | 30,474 | <issue_start>username_0: **TL;DR**: Young graduate student in his first year of a PhD program who has lost a passion for the academic world. Seriously considering quitting but don't know what to do. Science background.
**My background**
I'm 21-25, with a Science background, B.Sc in Physics. Took a year off between Undergrad and Grad school and worked full time as a research scientist. Theoretical background (most of my work has consisted of modelling). Strong quantitative and computer skills. Excel in presentation/project focused environments.
**General Information**
I am currently finishing the second semester of my first year in a PhD program at a top tier US school in an engineering program. I have a full scholarship that pays for all of my tuition and a living stipend (typical graduate student stipend ~$1800 a month after taxes, so quite enough to live off of). I'm not a US citizen (from Canada), so I'm here on a student VISA, so if I decide to stop I have 2 weeks to leave the country. I cannot hold any other employment in the US while here on my VISA. My PhD consists of ~1.5 years of combined coursework and research, followed by a qualifier at the end of that period (research based), then into your thesis (doesn't have to be related to what your qualifier research was on).
**Current Academic Situation**
I came first semester ready to start a new life...(first time moving away from home- did my undergrad where I was born). I did very well first semester (3.9/4.0 GPA) and research was on track (mostly lit. review). By the end of first semester however, I noticed that I was losing interest very quickly in both my coursework and research - it started to become very hard to get myself through to work on a daily basis. Went home Christmas break for a few weeks and came back to start my second semester and immediately noticed a big change. I started to struggle in my classes and fall behind on research. It wasn't that the material was too difficult, I just had no motivation to do it. No excuses here - just didn't really want to do it so I didn't. I reached the end of the semester and realized just how far behind I was. I am likely going to hit ~C average this semester (A last) and am drastically behind on research. I had weekly-biweekly meetings with my supervisor all semester, but I sort of hid just how bad things were going. Had a long meeting last week where I basically came clean on everything (said I was struggling in classes, behind on research) and the supervisor was very supportive. The supervisor believed in my potential and suggested I speak to a school counsellor and emphasized that this kind of thing was common for doctoral students.
**Personal situation/feelings**
I come from a family where both my parents have PhDs. Although my parents have always been supportive and open to my life, I feel as though they would be very disappointed if I quit and this pressure is very real to me. I have tried to have the conversation with them and their attitude is mostly: "just put your head down and work through it, it's just a phase". Quite frankly most people seem to think it's a "phase" when I tell them. Outside of school my life is great. I'm not unhappy or depressed, I have hobbies, friends, I work out - it's just school that makes me feel this way. I just don't like the academic world at all any more. I HATE classes (always have) and where in the past research has been the saving grace keeping me interested in school, it now is losing a lot of it's appeal.
Basically, I feel no passion or drive for what I am doing any more. This for me is a huge problem. I'm not the kind of person who lacks passion in life. Quite the opposite in fact. Right now I have no such drive for school. I have a long term long distance relationship with someone from home that is incredibly happy and stable. They visited here many times since I moved and we are doing great. I would be lying if I said it wasn't a factor in me wanting to quit. (Having my partner move here is a lot more complicated). The relationship has been incredibly supportive and is very aware of my current situation and has maintained a very neutral stance, trying to play devils advocate wherever possible and trying to make sure it doesn't influence the decision. I should state that I am pretty sure if I had to choose between school and the relationship, I would choose the relationship immediately with no regrets.
I have just reached a point where I find myself doing just about anything else but school work. I'll get groceries, clean the apartment, watch TV etc... before doing any work. I'm trying to stick around for a couple of months for the summer (to see if not having classes changes anything) but since talking to my supervisor I'm already having doubts about even that. At this point, I feel like moving home and getting any job would make me happier than what I am doing.
**Financial situation**
I have a few thousand dollars in the bank (enough to get me home /move out etc...) and zero debt. If I move back home, I can likely live with my parents for the first month to get back, then I'd be looking for a job and moving in with my partner. I realize having no debt puts me ahead of a lot of people and I'm not particularly concerned about the situation financially - I'm very lucky to have what I have and am aware of this.
So what's the deal? I know I have this amazing opportunity. I'm at a top tier school on a full scholarship. I wake up every day and get to work with the top minds in my field doing important research. I'm doing something a very small % of the population ever gets a chance at and yet still I have no motivation to do it. I'm not sure if I'm doing it for me any more, or I'm doing it so I don't let down other people in my life. My parents, mentors, friends, all the people who keep telling me how amazing this opportunity is. The more I look back, the more I realize that Grad school was what I did because I basically just didn't have another plan.
**What would I like to do**
I'd love to find a job. I don't need to make a lot of money to be happy - I live off of 22k a year right now and am perfectly comfortable. Money isn't a major motivator for me. Working in the financial sector, doing quantitative risk analysis, banking, DoD, just about anything sounds more appealing than school to me. I know I'm smart and I've got a strong quantitative background combined with very good personal skills. I'm great with people and one of the things I HATE about the academic world is how under-used that part of my skill set feels.
I have no idea what to do. I want to quit, but I haven't. Maybe I shouldn't? I've been looking into options, but quite frankly I'd much prefer to have some kind of plan before quitting - at the very least this pays my living right now. I'd love advice from anyone. Someone who's been in this situation, someone who hasn't It doesn't matter.
I know that what I am doing does not make me happy. But I don't know what will. Please help.
---
**Update two years later**
I chose to leave school, and came home. My relationship fell apart but I found a decent job working for a tech startup and did that for about 1.5 years - I saved some money and took some time off and now I'm doing full time analytics consulting work for a website - It's working out well so far and I enjoy the freedom of it (work from home) etc. Though I do often wonder about what would have happened if I stayed, I don't regret it.<issue_comment>username_1: Here is my general advice for graduate students who are thinking about quitting graduate school (and I'll sprinkle in some specific advice):
1. At one point or another, almost every graduate student wants to quit, so *you're not alone*. The fact that you're not alone doesn't solve any problems, but it may give you some peace of mind. The advice from your supportive advisor to seek out counseling is a very, very good one.
2. The decision to get a graduate degree is personal and different for everyone, but regardless it is a long-term decision that will probably have a significant effect on your future. The five or six years of your life spent doing it could open up many doors; that is not to say that other opportunities aren't worth considering. You really do have to do what is best for yourself, in the end.
3. Getting a PhD really does require passion (and in your case this is weaning right now). You can push through a pretty good chunk of time without it, but if you don't find the passion, it's going to be a long haul. If you were passionate and lost that, try to figure out what it was that you were passionate about before, and see if you can get back in the groove. [One of my favorite <NAME> stories is about how he rebounded from a slump because he watched a spinning plate in the dining hall](http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~kilcup/262/feynman.html).
4. If you hate classes, make it a priority to finish them up quickly so you can concentrate on the research! Classes, while important, are not why you are in graduate school. A friend's advisor told his students that he would be upset if they were getting A+'s, meaning that they weren't spending enough time on research.
5. You can take time off from graduate school and come back later. This is hard to do (particularly if you have to leave the country), and you can't necessarily expect the same financial support when you return. But, you can do it, and if you need time off, take it. My suggestion for you if you are still on the fence about staying in grad school is to look at an internship somewhere for the summer where you are away from school and can clear your head. Then come back next semester.
All of my advice is kind of ignoring what may be your most important statement:
>
> I want to quit, but I haven't.
>
>
>
If you've thought through all the reasons why you want to quit, and this is the answer, then you should take time off -- 'quit' is a harsh word, and not really a necessary one (see point 5). Your point is well taken that you shouldn't try to stick it out for anyone but yourself -- we all go through worries about disappointing others, but most people want you to be happy, and they will understand. You will almost certainly find a big weight lifted from your shoulders, and not extra pressure from those around you. Yes, having a plan before moving on is always a good idea, but I've been in a number of places in my life where I decided to do something before having a definite plan, and it all worked out in the end. Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I know how you feel because even as an undergraduate, I once packed my bags. But a friend prevailed on me and I'm still thankful for not quitting. Consider the following:
1. If you start a count down to finish date and get really excited about seeing the day approach, you'll know time passes really quickly.
2. Our emotions/feeling/circumstances are temporary/passing but our achievements (good or bad) are permanent.
3. Creative/innovative people (like you) get tired of routine. If you take interest in something around you that requires you to learn something challenging (say music) or something alien to you, your PhD vital signs may be positively influence.
I am not an expert at these things but I know that when I get tired of routine... I stimulate my creativity somewhere else... Not for the gain but for the challenge.
Good luck man...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Whatever you decide to do, just keep in mind that leaving a Ph.D. program because it's just not right for you does not represent any kind of failure on your part. I know plenty of people who didn't leave graduate school because they thought quitting would mean admitting that they couldn't hack it; **this simply isn't true**, and if your only reason for staying in school is that you don't want to disappoint your peers, parents, or advisor, then you should think long and hard about taking some time off from school and reassessing what you want to do.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: If you don't feel any passion or motivation after the second semester, I'd say you have to really take a hard look at if graduate school is something for you as you'd still have a few years to go. If you should quit or not firstly depends on what you want. You need to try and find out why you lost your passion. Was it there first, and did something cause it to leave? Where you ambivalent about graduate school, and now you found out it was not for you?
Please do not stay just because you might disappoint others, live is just too short for that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Your issues are real and I do not want to discount them in anyway.
In my view, you are in a privileged position and if you can make the most of it, then it would be not be a loss (as you tend to describe your experience now).
Here is a simple test: think of where you want to be in (say) five years from now? If you want to be in a place which requires a PhD, then start working on it now, other wise get out.
I know this is simplistic but it works when the issues are complicated and there are no easy solutions. At least in this way, you will make an informed decision and will not have the guilt later on!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You are not alone.
Most graduate students are in their 20’s. Many have boy/girl friends and are away from their partners while in school. Many graduate students are international. They go abroad to study. They are away from their home countries. They study in a different environment/culture. They may have language problems. Fortunately, your situation is not that bad. Many graduate students go to graduate school as a family tradition. Their parents/relatives are academics. They were raised to be academics.
Most (if not all) graduate students have trouble with their course/research works in school one time or another. Many graduate students lose their interests in the school. Some quit. Some stay.
Your long post seems to suggest to me that you mixed your personal life with the graduate school life. We are human. We have emotions. We let our personal life interfere with other aspects of our life sometimes. We know we should not let it happen. But, it happens.
You did well in the first semester. Everything changed in the second one. Something happened. No one knows what happened except you. In other words, you are the only one who knows the answer.
I would suggest you to take a break, long or short, to figure out what you really want to do. Then, make your own decision.
There are good answers and commentaries here. I will not repeat them. I would emphasize something very important, your future is yours.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: Given the glut of PhD's I would suggest that you get a real job. A PhD is worth only if you are really interested in doing research otherwise you'll waste 4-5 years (then another 3-4 years doing a postdoc). Faculty positions are few and far between and then you'll have to worry about getting funds/tenure. So unless you're highly motivated by research/academia you'll mostly be miserable. In the industry a PhD doesn't make much more then a Masters and significantly less than a MBA, so there is no financial justification. Also there is a very good chance that you'll be working on things which don't even require a PhD. Some are lucky to find a good research environment but not everyone.
On the flip side if you do quit now then at some point you'll regret not getting a PhD. So think about what you want to do in life (besides having and providing for your children). A (PhD) degree is just a means to an end. People sometimes get emotional about it but they should not. Talk to your parents and I am sure they'll understand.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: See if you can get a Master's in your second year, so that your graduate studies are not completely wasted. This is but too common in doctoral programs that they let students who are admitted to doctoral programs without being the "doctorate material" to finish the required number of courses, take the qualifier as the bottom line as far as qualification goes, and let you off with a Master's degree. They don't like that, but that's likely flight overbooking: you know that some people are not going to make it. Discuss this with your adviser.
For what I see on the earnings curves, there's a notable jump at 4 years of college/getting a Bachelor's degree, where the average earnings jump up by may be 15% from "Some college" to "BA degree" category. After that, the incomes are pretty flat, with a very modest 2 or so % return per year of education. So you ain't losing much in income, but an unfinished degree puts a big "L" across your forehead. I mean, if you drop out and found a Google or a Facebook, that's fine, but the probability of that happening is about 1e-6. (You don't know how funny that 20k figure is going to look like when your new wife asks you: "As I am expecting a baby, we need a bigger house... and also please open the college saving account for our baby", so your bold statements about income are totally out of line with real life. Or at least the life you will have in 10 years time.) The engineers that I taught seem to be starting off at $40-50Kpa, and I see no reason why a guy with a decent quant background should be making less than that.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: I'm surprised that both the question and the existing answers talk little about what *used* to motivate you to do research. You wrote, "where in the past research has been the saving grace keeping me interested in school, it now is losing a lot of its appeal". So what was that appeal, and how did it get lost?
Here are some possible answers, from my own experience; I'm sure there may be others in your case.
Did you get disillusioned about your field of research? Perhaps in the beginning you thought that if problems in this field were solved it would make a difference in the world, and now it seems that the big problems can't be solved and solving the small problems won't make a big difference?
Did you get disillusioned about academia? Did you have experiences that changed your view of academia? Did you come in the pursuit of truth and found that a lot of it is about the pursuit of publications?
Did you get disillusioned about your own abilities? Perhaps you were used to often being the best at what you were doing, and now you're surrounded by more smart people and your abilities seem less exceptional (and thus less motivating) in comparison?
Or perhaps your motivation had always been to please your parents and now that's not enough anymore?
I think having a clear understanding of what used to motivate you and why it stopped motivating you is a necessary and sufficient basis for the decision you're trying to make. If you lost interest in this particular field, you might have to look for a new field. If you lost the motivation that comes from a strong belief in your exceptional abilities, you might have to learn to enjoy being among the best and not necessarily the best. If your view of academia changed, you might try to find a place where academia is more how you'd like it to be, or if there doesn't seem to be one, perhaps academia isn't the right place for you. If you were only doing it for your parents, perhaps you should just leave. And if you lost interest because it turned out to be harder than you expected, then perhaps you should indeed "just put your head down and work through it, it's just a phase".
I think the key to sorting this out for yourself is to keep an open mind about your own motivations. Some of them may have been very pure and just got lost along the way and perhaps you can tap into them again; some of them may not seem so desirable now that you take a new look at them, and you may be glad not to have them anymore; but whatever they are, what's important is that you're honest about them to yourself and figure out how and why they changed, and that might allow you to see where they're leading you and whether staying or leaving is more in line with what's important to you now.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_10: PhDs are not for everyone. That's why most top-tier schools have about a 50% retention rate, some closer to 25-30%. You need to discover what makes you passionate, and it might not be what a PhD will get you.
I have a friend who is currently getting his Bachelor's degree. His father is a rocket scientist for NASA, so naturally he went into the Physics program. It took only a couple semesters of C's and D's for him to realize Physics isn't for him, so he switched to Computer Science. Then he realized he hates Math, so he wanted to switch majors again.
All this time, though, he has had a creative outlet. He makes things, sometimes out of leather, sometimes out of steel; the other day he came to class with a clay pot he'd just finished. Toward the end of this last semester he went through with changing his major one last time. He already has too many CS credits to give up on that major altogether, but he's dropping the Math minor that comes *de facto* and is picking up an Art minor instead.
I've never seen him happier than he is now. He found what he's passionate about, and it's not what his father did. You have to discover your passion. And it sounds like the job you had back home is just that.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: First and foremost, you have to look out for you, and only you. By this, I mean your well-being, your happiness and your own future.
As many have said, rather than quit at this stage, take some time out from the study. If I may suggest some things to do in your hiatus - volunteer work, teaching in a high school, perhaps try something completely different.
You are definitely not alone - I am a PhD student and have found myself in the exact some situation, took some time - concentrated on my job (teaching), travelled, lived overseas, even did some acting. I felt rejuvenated and ready to tackle the project. In my case, I returned to study. But, all situations are very different - you have to give yourself some time and space to work out what it is you want.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Just suck it in and get it!
After you pass all the formal requirements, you will have a mini-tenure for 3/4/5 years (depending on the Dept you are in). I was thinking to quit first two years but now (in the mini-tenure period) I'm enjoying my life and research (from 9 to 5 only).
Try it, if you don't like it, you can always quit.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_13: I read your post and from what I can see you don't sound like you enjoy your PhD or academic life in general. I personally did not find the reason why your situation became so hard. Perhaps you don't feel ok with the fact that your girlfriend is at home and you have to be somewhere else. Perhaps you you don't find the project entertaining. I'd say it might be the research itself that does not motivate you. One thing I am certain about is that you have to feel passion for doing research. You need to be determined and driven. Otherwise, it's easy to lose motivation.
You may need to ask yourself if you really need to stay where you are! PhD is for those who plan to be professional researchers. It's only counts if you plan to stay at any university. Not only will this have to be your everyday job, you will also have to be the person who proposes many new projects and be a leader for others. If don't see yourself in this roll, then it's probably better if you consider quitting. It's nothing wrong with quitting PhD. Besides, you can still begin a PhD somewhere else. You don't need to stick to the one you don't enjoy.
I can tell you that I met many people in my office. Everyone of them had their sort of crisis and this seems quite natural stage in the whole process. The research is also not a usual job and can be frustrating. Things always go wrong. Only determination, enjoyment, and passion make people stay and continue their PhDs.
As some of the others already said, It's nothing wrong when you quit PhD. Taking a longer break, coming home for couple of months, calming down may help you realise and understand a lot of things which are difficult to spot when you under pressure.
Good luck
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: It seems to me like the fundamental question here is that of whether or not your current feelings are part of a typical grad student "phase" or indicative of misaligned life goals, priorities, etc. on a much deeper level. Ultimately, a question you'll have to answer on your own and most likely by trusting your gut and intuition.
There are many, many reasons why you might be feeling the way you do now. From your description it's clear that you started the PhD process knowing you were accepting less than ideal conditions in some areas of your life with the understanding that these would be offset by other benefits. You might be more or less ambivalent about some of those benefits now that you're in the process, and the tradeoffs and benefits would certainly change if you were to switch sides and leave the program.
I would suggest assuming, for the time being, that one-year-ago you made a well educated calculation of the costs-benefits of the PhD program, in particular with a time horizon greater than 5 years.
Staying in the program then means trusting in the vision of one-year-ago you in that the long-term benefits to your life outweigh the immediate suffering (including the less than ideal use of your skills and the momentary loss of passion). On the other hand, your valuation of the tradeoffs and benefits of the PhD may have changed more than you expected, in particular with respect to your relationship or your connection to the research area.
The way to know this, in short, is to trust yourself. If your current path is just *wrong* for you -- if you feel you're compromising some fundamental part of yourself -- then trust that feeling. Otherwise, trust your prior vision: accept that your feelings are part of the PhD journey and trust that you'll find your passion again soon (when you stop putting pressure on yourself to find it).
One last thought that might really be the crux of the issue is that getting a PhD is a highly individualistic and very lonely experience. [<NAME> has a talk](http://public.randomnotes.org/richard/PhDtalk.html) that really drove this home in which he says:
>
> A PhD, by its very nature, is a very individualistic venture. ... The next big surprise for people who are starting PhDs after an undergraduate degree is just how excrutiatingly lonely a PhD is.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: Finish what you started.
I dropped out of a prestigious program 6 years ago, with much of the same reasoning:
* "The degree is just a piece of paper anyway"
* "If I want to learn things I can just learn them on my own"
* "What's the point? To spend that many years just to get a qualification to impress other people. I don't care about money, and if I want a job I can get a job now." (I was making $80/hour on contract work at the time.)
* "I'm planning on starting my own business"
But here I am, 6 years later, applying for grad school to give it another go.
Here are my reasons for going back: (I welcome people to correct me if I'm wrong about any of these!)
* Most full time employment is mindblowingly dull. As a student you don't fully appreciate this.
* A PhD is not very different from a job in the sense that you have to show up and do some work, most of which you don't necessarily want to do. The difference is, with a PhD you get something at the end, but with a job there is just endless tedium. Also with a graduate degree you get to use your brain a bit more.
* Your job prospects will be severely diminished, and your salary will be lower. It is fairly difficult to get a good research job without a graduate degree, and most opportunities outside of grunt work will be closed to you.
* In academia, you're used to working with smart people and having intelligent discussions, etc. If you leave and enter typical workforce, that goes away. There will always be a significant gap in academic potential between you and your colleagues and this will bother you because it means you are not hitting your potential and are effectively being under-utilized and under-paid.
* Feeling underutilized and unchallenged is very very bad. You will hate your job and therefore hate your life, and it all goes downhill from there..
* Everybody wants money. Most people that want money really badly, have at some point in their lives said "Nah, I don't care about money, money doesn't make you happy." Being broke doesn't make you happy either.
* The fact that you quit will forever haunt you. No amount of "Bill gates dropped out too" or "I'm too independent to need this" will make you feel better when you see your former classmates graduate with PhDs while you have to live with the fact that you started but gave up.
* In the workforce it doesn't always matter how smart you are. Most places I've interviewed have trouble hiding how impressed they were, and several have told me directly that I'm the best candidate they've ever seen. I always breezed through the most difficult interview questions and I've gotten offers from Google, Facebook, Amazon, Goldman Sachs, etc. BUT at the end of the day all of the jobs they offered were boring menial tasks. You could argue that it's possible to start with a menial job and then work your way up, but as I mentioned before, a PhD is also a job, why not just finish that?
Also, regarding your note on quantitative finance, please be very aware that the world of quantitative finance is very competitive and most places won't consider you if you don't have a PhD. I know because I tried several times to get a job doing quant work, but every firm I spoke with only offered back-end jobs doing menial SQL work. Your mileage may vary, but be warned that most people don't care about how good you think your quantitative skills are. (One fairly famous hedge fund manager told me very directly "everyone thinks they're going to be great at a new skill, so why would anyone risk their money on an unknown, unproven entity?".)
Upvotes: 5 |
2013/05/05 | 959 | 3,945 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student of electronics and telecommunication engineering in a govt. college in India. But I am extremely interested in physics and mathematics. I want to pursue a research career in physics and mathematics. I generally receive suggestions like taking the GRE test. But I have the following questions:
1. What is the minimum amount of physics I am supposed to have mastered at the end of my engineering?
2. How much of physics or physics related subjects should I have in my UG course?
3. How much is an adequate grade (What puzzles me most is that if I am intending to do physics why should my grades in engineering should be considered?)<issue_comment>username_1: I believe Engineering (communication) gives you a good amount of mathematical tools. It gives you basics in Physics like electromagnetic for instance. In Physics and Math, they concentrate more on the physical aspects and mathematical aspects of Physics and Math. In engineering, they focus more on applications. Moreover, they focus much more on theoretical aspects. For instance, there is a big difference between a probability course for mathematicians and that for communication engineers.
I think you can compete, since engineering students are usually smart. Perhaps you will need to take few courses before being able to compete with students having undergrad degrees in Physics or even Math.
Note: I have an engineering degree (electrical), and then moved to Computer science. I can't really answer your question precisely. But when I started my Master I needed to do study 2-4 CS courses.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Cross-disciplinary movement does happen fairly frequently, particularly between engineering and the mathematical and physical sciences. Unfortunately, as the academic disciplines themselves become more cross-disciplinary, it becomes much harder to say what *specific* training one needs to move from one field to another between the undergraduate and graduate levels.
A good way to check for the qualifications you are likely to need is to examine the course requirements of schools you're already interested in attending as a graduate student—if your undergraduate program has sufficient depth in math and physics to allow you to take those courses as a graduate student, then an admissions committee will likely be OK with the lateral movement.
If you have questions about what is necessary, you can contact the person in charge of admissions at some of the departments you're interested in for further clarification.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I am on the same path as of yours. I am thinking of taking IELTS test. Well actually I did Electronics and Comm bachelors and worked for 2 years in embedded systems and now planning for physics masters.To bridge the gap, I am right now taking courses in coursera.org and edx.org. Perhaps you can consider this too.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: It is *very* difficult, almost impossible, to enter into a good graduate program in the US with an undergraduate program in engineering from India. So, instead of preparing for the GRE, you should try to get into the Masters program in Math at
[ISI](http://www.isical.ac.in/~deanweb/sample2013.html), [CMI](http://www.cmi.ac.in/admissions/) or maybe at the [IIT's](http://gate.iitd.ac.in/jam/). If you're interested in physics you should try to get into a Masters physics program at IIT through JAM. So, you should start preparing for their entrance tests.
I would suggest you to choose either physics or math because preparing for both the entrance tests at the same time can be really difficult.
Grades
Since you asked about grades and courses I think these pages will give you a good idea.
<http://www.physicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1847>
<http://www.mathematicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1003>
<http://www.mathematicsgre.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=685>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/06 | 1,164 | 4,997 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been discussing with friends and colleagues about the strategy to use to decide, in a research group, who has to go to a conference and with who.
The issue is: if someone in the research group submitted a scientific paper to a conference, and it was accepted, should he/she go all alone to the conference, or with other group members?
Basically, I found two different way of thoughts:
1) since money is always lacking, and it is important to broaden the scientific discoveries and to have new professional relationships, **only the main author of the paper should go to the conference, all alone**. If everyone goes to a different conference, the team works will better scatter, and they will get more visibility.
2) since to work as a group, it is important to think as a group and, above all, to team up (if there is enough money), **all the paper authors or all the research group should go to the conference**. This way the group will team up and personal relationships between the research group members will strengthen.
What do you think?
**Which school of thoughts do you stand for?**<issue_comment>username_1: Seems pretty simple. If the only reason you are attending the conference is to present the paper, then only one person (the presenter) should go. If there is value to the conference beyond that to more people in the group (i.e., other interesting research is being presented, it's possible to setup helpful meetings), then more people should go.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If I
1. had the time, and
2. had the money,
I would go to every conference directly related to my field that I could. They are a fantastic way to find out where the tip of the spear is in your field, to network and meet new people, and to see parts of the world you might not be able to see otherwise. Additionally, many conferences have workshops, expos, and special speakers that all add to one's professional development.
Why do I bring all that up? Most, if not all of the time, it is professionally advantageous for everyone involved with a paper to attend conferences. Practically, this rarely happens (at least in my field), simply because funds can't support it, and time commitments make it difficult to travel to various parts of the world.
So, my answer is, **send as many people as can practically afford to go,** because they will almost certainly gain from the experience.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: @username_2 explains the importance of going to conferences. I will not repeat them.
I would suggest some practical solutions.
If you only have one accepted paper this year. Send as many as you can. Find cheaper airfares, share hotel rooms. Talk to your supervisor to get support. Apply for travel grants else where, for example, see [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/9814/546).
Long term wise, write more papers. Get more accepted papers. Then you guys can take turns. For example, half go to this conference, the other half go to the next one. As a group, you can work it out.
Just don't miss the conferences.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Any answer should work for research groups of all sizes. Sending the entire research group does not: in a large group, people will be spending all their time at conferences and none actually doing work, or people with conference-worthy work will avoid going simply because it takes too much time.
Likewise, everyone who is an author can be too many; there is some very good work done where very many people are on each paper (due, for example, to many different skills being needed, and the required skills being provided by people who specialize in different areas).
So even if funds permit, the "everyone goes" answer is not a good answer in general.
On the other hand, going to *some* conference is a very valuable way to keep up with the field you're in. Thus, a sensible strategy is something like:
1. Everyone in the group goes to at least one conference a year--that one which is most relevant to what they're doing. There is usually a default conference that is obvious if a more specialized one does not apply. For example, in neuroscience one could choose to go to the Society for Neuroscience conference if one wasn't working in an area where some other meeting made more sense.
2. The most critical person/people go to any additional conferences that are valuable and where they are presenting. In addition to going because one is presenting, people should go (funding available) when it will be very useful to them, either because they've done the work, or they ought to be doing work in that area so they get up to speed.
The key is to not treat this as a purely social event. It is to an extent, but you're also trying to develop people's skills and increase their exposure / interaction with peers, and neither simpleminded model of "go yourself if you are presenting" or "everyone goes" adequately accomplishes these goals.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/06 | 1,741 | 7,462 | <issue_start>username_0: I completed my PhD research as an industry based researcher. My employer was fully aware of my research. There was no support given by the employer other than encouragement. However, I used the company information which I had access to as part of my role. My employer had no objection and I was extremely careful of the disclosure I made.
I have now completed my PhD and graduated. My dissertation is publicly available on my university website. A google search can bring it up too.
QUESTION: If my employer wants to use my dissertation, would it be ethical for me to ask for a payment?
EDIT: To clarify some comments below, my company wants to use my dissertation as part of an advocacy campaign.<issue_comment>username_1: Congratulations on your Ph.D.! You have contributed to humanity's lasting store of knowledge. To a first approximation, this knowledge is now freely available to everyone on the planet who is interested (and, perhaps, who can afford reproduction costs and/or to travel to your university), including your employer.
If they are still employing you, and they found your Ph.D. work valuable, your employer may find it in both your and their interests to increase your salary to retain you and encourage you to perform more similarly useful work for them. But asking them to pay you for using something that is freely available strikes me as counter to the principle of the academic pursuit in the first place.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think your question is best rephrased as follows:
>
> If ***someone*** wants to use my dissertation, would it be ethical for me to ask for a payment?
>
>
>
Assuming you are asking about using the *intellectual content* of your dissertation, the answer is **NO**. Whether or not that *someone* is your employer is irrelevant.
However, your actual *presentation* is protected by copyright, which for dissertations is normally completely held by the author. So if *someone* wanted to use your specific words and/or figures beyond the limits of [fair use](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use), then you have the right to seek compensation.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The short answer is that it isn't unethical to *ask* for anything. It's just a question of how comfortable you are, and your relationship with that company. If you have some figure in mind which is can be justified somehow and you feel comfortable asking, then send them an invoice.
Oh, and can I have fifty bucks?
See, that wasn't so hard at all, and I don't feel dirty or anything.
I suspect the real question is "do I have a moral basis for asking for compensation"? Based on your description of the situation, I would say yes, especially if in their campaign they make it appear that the material from your thesis is associated with them, through you.
The information that you used in the research is worth something, and use of the research in the campaign is worth something. Dollar figures can be put on it, and a difference can be computed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I would like to address the title itself - how to benefit from wider distribution/usage/awareness of your research.
First, congratulations on your PhD - and your job!
I think it is very reasonable to want to get more benefit - financial or otherwise - for your work, so I hope I can suggest some ways you can make that happen.
For your dissertation, I believe your full compensation will be considered already paid. You were on staff when you made it, and from the wording I assume your employer let you spend "company time" on your work without threatening your pay or position. They also allowed you access and data that would likely have been unavailable to other researchers, and the quality of the data was likely high enough that you would have had to pay a significant sum of money for access to it - unless they have an open-data initiative, which almost no one seems to have in private industry (or at least its very rare). So your employer will almost certainly consider you paid in full, and consider any extra request ungrateful at best.
However, you are in a very good position - not only has the company employed and supported your work for years, but they are now expressing their opinion of your research and the value of it in a very positive way. They are saying its worth additional investment of time and money not just from you, but from other people as well.
Therefore, your potential is in the future work - not your past products. That's the only reason companies employ people anyway - for work to be produced, not out of gratitude for past accomplishments.
Now you are already the subject matter expert, so what would you like? Would you like to do some travel, presentation work, advocacy? How about more ambitious research which could be of even higher value to the company? Can a reasonable case be made for more generous expense accounts, a (larger) research budget, more latitude/authority in data collection or process improvement/alteration?
If nothing else you are in a good position for salary negotiations in the coming year, as you are now officially a PhD, and if they want to embrace and use your research then presumably they have a high opinion of you with good performance evaluations. If you want an administrative role, assistant(s), etc, now would be a good time to start brainstorming and dialog with your employer to see what plans they have for you, or if you just want to do more research you should all be on the same page.
If you want to just focus on your research and go back to work, that's fine too! If you will be doing post-doc work and therefore aren't simply done with school entirely, that's fine, but if you are done and it is implied that you'll be focusing/working with the company more then that is more support for increased pay going forward.
So you can very well get an extra payoff for your accomplishments, but its not likely to be in the form of paying to use your dissertation. You might qualify for a bonus, but that is usually something discussed before the fact. Its also possible that their use of your dissertation is a minor issue to them, so don't think it's worth millions if they are just trying to make use of something they feel they already paid for in a minor campaign that's <1% of their ad/PR budget.
**TL;DR** Collect your data, have a bullet-proof case of your value now and increasing value in the future, and I really suggest you not focus on trying to get more pay for past performance but rather take your pay in future salary/bonuses/prestige/etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This kind of question is, incidentally, why it's very good to have a clear "Who gets to do what?" document before you set out - for example, I had very frank discussion with some people providing data for my PhD as to what *they* expected to get out of it.
In terms of the content of your dissertation, my take is not really - the whole point of academic research is to put it out into the world, and its not exactly surprising that the folks who employ you might find it useful.
So no, I wouldn't be inclined to ask for money directly.
*However*, if the company does indeed end up using it, the fact that they did so, and your intellectual output is contributing to the bottom line should absolutely come up in your next promotion meeting/performance review, etc.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/07 | 1,523 | 6,080 | <issue_start>username_0: Is there a correct or preferred format for indicating 'Dr' or 'PhD' (or both) on a professional business card.
Background: I am employed in the industry and I have just earned my PhD (in social science). My company wants to update my business card.
The following are two options:
* Dr Name, PhD, University Name
* Name, PhD, University Name
I am told that it may be a sign of arrogance but I am also told that if you have earned it, you deserve it.<issue_comment>username_1: My time in industry is longer than in academia. I would like to provide you with my opinion.
I would suggest
>
> Name, PhD in Discipline name, University name
>
>
> Job title
>
>
>
I think university name is optional. The discipline name is necessary because people want to know what you know. PhD in physics is very different from PhD in social science.
Please be aware of the possible negative effects of adding the PhD title.
There are quite a bit anti-academia attitude in industry. Some people dislike academics. They believe the academians know nothing but theory. They rather do business with non-academians. For me, I deeply respect academics. I believe a company can offer me good quality products if they have PhDs as some of their employees. So, I am more willing to do business with them. However, I think I am minority. Many industry people do not think that way.
If your employer is a consulting company, your title can be helpful. The PhD title can convince your clients you can offer them high value services. If your employeer is a constructing company, you might want to think twice before you update your business card.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: "Dr Name, PhD" is redundant, so this usage is often discouraged. If you are going to indicate the degree, I'd recommend "Name, PhD" rather than "Dr Name" since it's more informative (at the very least it will keep anyone from thinking you are a medical doctor). In the U.S. it's not common to indicate the university, but I think I've seen it more often in other countries.
I'd suggest thinking carefully before indicating your degree on a business card. Some people without PhDs may respond bitterly, like you are bragging about your accomplishments or implying that your expertise is more valuable than theirs. At the same time, some people with PhDs will look down on it as well, in a status hierarchy:
1. Some insecure people without PhDs feel resentful and don't want to be distinguished from PhD holders.
2. Some insecure people with PhDs try hard not to be confused with group 1, thereby irritating those people all the more.
3. Some better-established PhD holders aren't worried about being confused with group 1, but now they don't want to be confused with group 2, so they pointedly denounce emphasizing your degree as being tacky and in poor taste.
As a rule of thumb, I would omit the degree from your business card unless it's important for your credibility (i.e., the skills from your PhD are professionally important and people would otherwise assume you don't have them).
The one situation in which you should absolutely not indicate a degree is if it's irrelevant. For example, if you're an accountant with a PhD in literature, then your business card should not read "Name, PhD."
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In your case, I would suggest "Yes, put *<NAME>, Ph.D*" on your card. You could optionally put "in social science" on it if you'd like.
I cannot speak about the culture in Australia, but in the United States and Canada, it is appropriate to put your title (Ph.D) on your business card if the industry generally is supportive of or respects academics, or in which high degrees are not common. I might guess Australia's culture is similar.
Industries that would want to be proud to have a Ph.D on staff especially would be non-profit organizations, advocacy groups, research think-tanks, and consulting. As you said that your employer was an advocacy group, I believe that putting your degree on your business card is beneficial.
Industries in which you would NOT put your degree on your business card would probably be software high-tech (because no one cares) or in academia (not because no one cares, but basically any assistant professor and up basically has a Ph.D and therefore it's not impressive), or, as mentioned above, a construction management company or similar.
(As an aside, a whole bunch of people at a conference I was at rolled their eyes when they saw one of the authors wrote "*name*, Ph.D" on a paper.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The style chosen is at the discretion of the one conferred with the doctorate. These are styles are common in the UK - they can include all qualifications, including professional certifications:
* Dr. Name, PhD, MSc, BSc
* Dr. Name, MD, MBChB, BSc DRCOG, MRCGP
The doctorate position and its responsibilities are accompanied with certain rights and privileges including the title and style. You can even have your passport include the Dr. It is a legal right. If you have just earned a doctorate, wear it proudly and congratulations, Dr.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In your particular case, working for a advocacy company and being asked to update your business card, you can overlook the snarky comments. I believe that only medical doctors use the Dr honorific on their business card. So <NAME>, Ph.D. seems sufficient. There is no reason to to add university nor discipline. It is a nice ice breaker in a conversation when people ask "what is your PhD in?" and you can position your expertise into the context of the meeting.
As for the Dr <NAME>, yes by all means that is how you should be addressed on letters and in other contexts, or even simply as Dr Smith.
You have worked hard for your PhD, so you have earned the recognition that goes with it. As for the people with insecurities, it is how you conduct yourself that makes the difference between coming across as a knowledgeable consultant or a pretentious person.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/07 | 953 | 3,974 | <issue_start>username_0: I am wondering what are the advantages/drawbacks of sharing a dissertation on a specialised website (for example [Social Capital Gateway](http://www.socialcapitalgateway.org/resources/phd-theses)). There are a number of repositories available and they seem to be more widely known. Are these sites more for the benefit of the facilitators than the contributors (who in this case are the PhD researchers).<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt there are any drawbacks to posting on such a site, other than the time required.
But I also doubt there are very many advantages. I don't think very many people will look on such sites for theses. If I need something from a PhD thesis, my algorithm would be something like this:
1. Look for published papers by the student which discuss the work.
2. Google the student's name and thesis title.
3. Look for the student's website.
4. Look on the department's website.
5. Look on the institution's library's website.
6. Try to contact the student (via website or Google search) and ask if they will send me a copy.
7. Try to contact the student's advisor and ask if they have a copy.
8. Contact someone else I know at the institution, and ask if they can find the thesis in their library.
9. Try to get a copy from [UMI](http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/) (last resort).
Searching other repositories would probably come somewhere between steps 8 and 9. So if you can try to make sure your thesis is findable at some earlier stage of this process, you probably don't need to bother with much more.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should make the thesis freely available somewhere that Google will find it, and that there are no paywalls or clickwalls.
If you have a web site and you plan to keep it available, putting your Ph.D. dissertationon your web site is a perfect solution.
If you don't have a personal web site that you will keep available, then another great solution can be to "tech report it": make it available as a tech report through the institution where you graduated. Many institutions make their tech reports freely available on the web and commit to ensuring they remain available. So, that's a great solution. (If your institution doesn't make their tech reports available over the web, you might want to bug your institution to suggest they do so.)
If neither of those is applicable, a third choice can be to make your dissertation available via arxiv or some other preprint server that is appropriate for your field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the question is,
sharing the dissertation on
>
> specialised sites vs. widely known repository sites
>
>
>
The advantage of specialised sites is that you get experts in your discipline to read your paper. I believe that's the purpose of sharing your dissertation in the first place.
On the other hand, widely known sites would have more visitors. You would have more interested readers. Whether they are experts is another matter.
However, I would like to raise an issue here. Many sites have paywall/clickwall. In particular, many require sign-ups. I often have trouble with links provided by users on this board. I follow the link, then find out I need to sign in to read the full text. More often than not, I give up at that point. I simply don't want to sign up unless I am really interested in the article.
I truly like arXiv because I don't need to sign up to read the papers. The time I need to sign in is when I upload my papers there.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Check with your school. Legally, the work usually belongs to them (it does so here in Chile), you might not be allowed to share it freely. I doubt they will object (the school is interested in becoming known, like for your work here), but they might place some restrictions on it (say state specifically that this is your thesis at the school, cite your advisor, whatever)
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/07 | 404 | 1,615 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing a technical paper for my college project. This is my first time so I don't have much experience in this arena.
I am writing about a philosophy used by Mechanical Engineers while designing a product. Now there is a situation where I have to mention a product and the company whose product it is.
I am saying this by:
```
... so popular that it has been incorporated by ABC Company in their XYZ Product suite ...
```
Now I want to ask whether I should mention that:
```
ABC & XYZ are registered trademark of ABC Inc.
```
If yes then where and in what format?<issue_comment>username_1: No need to mention the trademarks in a technical paper, although you could certainly cite their website if it talks about the product.
I generally cite anything that I think the reader could get more information about that is pertinent to the topic. That said, a paper isn't a web page, and you shouldn't litter it with gratuitous cites.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you're concerned, then you can say:
`... so popular that it has been incorporated by ABC Company(R) in their XYZ(TM) Product suite ...`
with appropriate glyphs for "registered" and "trademark".
But that said, I don't think it's strictly necessary to mention trademarks unless you have a compelling reason to do so.
(An example of a comeppling reason to do so would be if you had to run the paper by the company's lawyers first and they want you to refer to the product in a specific way. If so then in the best interest of collaboration you should do what their lawyers say.)
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/07 | 941 | 4,007 | <issue_start>username_0: A friend of mine applied to a PhD program and luckily they called her for a presentation. They said that the presentation should be a maximum of 10 minutes long and should consist of three slides. These slides should include past experience and research interests, they say.
We are trying to prepare an optimal presentation. We think of,
(1) Presenting a brief CV, including academic background, education etc.
(2) Past research experience, especially during the MSc thesis,
(3) Work experience.
In addition to research experience, we want to emphasize the teaching experience and the experience gained from the courses taken.
However the problem is that research experience and work experience significantly overlap with each other and we are concerned about not using slides optimally.
We would like to hear advice from you about this type of presentations. Or if you know any sources on the web that are specifically for these type of situations, we would be very happy to hear them.
Note that the presentation should be ten minutes long with three slides and should focus on interests & past experience of the individual.<issue_comment>username_1: I have not been in this situation so my answer below may be at odds. I was required to have a chat with a potential supervisor and then lodge a detailed application. The fact that the supervisor endorsed my topic was a sure indication of acceptance by the university.
It appears that you are being over cautious (and I can understand why - you only get one shot at this!). My advice is to follow the simple rule of presentation i.e. keep it clear, concise and relevant.
So I would suggest the following for your three slides:
* Slide 1 - Tell them what you want to do and how you will do it (i.e. topic and methods)
* Slide 2 - Tell them why you want to do it (i.e. gap in knowledge you are addressing)
* Slide 3 - Tell them how qualified you are to complete it (i.e. your skills and experience)
The contents and presentation skills go hand in hand, so prepare thoroughly. Unless you have a good reason, don't be too defensive of your approach. Give the impression that you are ready.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I also have not been in this situation, but my advice would be to focus on the work done during the MSc--what was the thesis on, why was it interesting, how would you extend it (to research, if it was not a research-based thesis; or to further experiments/work if it involved a significant research component already). If the work experience was related either to what the MSc was on, or to what the PhD will be on, go into that also; otherwise just mention it in passing.
The admissions committee already has all the information they need from the CV about what your friend's background is. What they don't know is how she can think about a research project, and how she comes across in person (in a formal setting like a brief talk). The latter will happen regardless of the choice of topic, so the former is, in my opinion, what to aim for.
Also, your friend should make sure that the presentation is tailored to the appropriate level for the people present! A bit of high-level why-is-this-important is good regardless of level, but if it's a very focused program in the same topic, she should go into more depth than if it's a broad one (e.g. computational neuroscience vs. biology).
Anyway, if I were listening to such a presentation, I would be trying to figure out: is she interested in research? Does she understand it? Is she enthusiastic about it? And, since the near-universal advice is "show, don't tell", I'd be looking not for her to say that she does/is any of these things, but for it to be implicit in the presentation.
Finally, I'm assuming she'll be talking one-on-one with a number of people also. That's probably more important! Stressing overly much about the presentation to the point of e.g. getting inadequate sleep is almost surely the wrong way to go.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/08 | 2,381 | 9,647 | <issue_start>username_0: I applied in Master's programmes in Europe / Asia (mostly Germany) this year and most of them were rejected or are still pending. My GPA in the Bachelor's is 7.19 / 10 while my TOELF iBT score is 100 / 120. Most of the Universities stated on their websites that the GRE (General or Subject) is optional, so I did not take the GRE.
After getting so many rejections and still being unable to figure out why, I am now thinking of strengthening my application to apply again in fall 2014. I have mailed universities / professors inquiring about reasons for rejection / shortcomings of my application, but none have replied. The only reply I get is that there were a lot of applications and mine just failed to compete with them.
I wish to know more about why my applications failed and how to improve? Also, as I don't know anyone around, I prepared my Statement of Purpose, Letter of Recommendations, Research Proposal, etc by going through the internet and information on website of universities (I did not copy-paste, but used the tips on how to write and stuff). I have no idea if the reason for my failed applications were because of low GPA / no GRE score or ill-prepared statement / research plan. Also, where can I get these checked and get suggestions on improving them?
I am very passionate about Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning and Ubiquitous Computing. I am planning on quitting my job at Oracle Financial Services (where I'm working as as Associate Consultant, writing code since SEP 2011 after my Bachelor's) to prepare for my application and dedicate full time and energy. I am aiming for admission in top 20 universities for Computer Science of the world and also aiming for a good scholarship. I want to appear for GRE later this year and get very good scores to try to compensate for my low GPA. But, when I checked few top universities (like MIT), it was mentioned they don't accept GRE scores. How can I try and get into such universities?
My goal is to complete my Master's, PhD and then continue researching on my areas of interest. Furthermore, the Subject GRE for Computer Science has been discontinued as per the ETS website!
Is there any hope of getting in top universities with a Bachelor's degree from an unknown university which is practically nowhere in the rankings? What to do now and how to do it, I am pretty confused and hope that someone here can help me.
Thanks for your time.
Rahul<issue_comment>username_1: **Focusing on test scores will not get you into MIT.**
You need research experience — real, world-class, publication-quality, independent research experience. A paper at a recognizable (from MIT) conference or workshop would be a big plus. The top students from the various IITs have such experience.
You need a statement that clearly and compellingly describes your research interests, experience, and vision, with enough specific *technical* detail to be credible. As an example: Describe a recent result (not just a paper title!) of your potential advisor, and suggest a credible strategy for applying or improving it. Also, your statement should frame your ambition in terms of "doing great research", not in terms of "getting into MIT". The top students from the various IITs write such statements.
You need recommendation letters from well-known (at MIT) academics that praise your research potential in personal, specific, and credible detail, with positive comparisons against other students from your home institution who have gone on to a top-10 PhD program. Your recommenders must write the letters themselves; you should never even see them. In particular, you should explicitly waive your right to see the letters later, if such a waiver is possible; most US schools offer such a waiver in their recommendation forms. The top students from the various IITs have letters like this.
You need contacts. Or more accurately, your recommenders need contacts. **Coming from "an unknown university" with a "low GPA", there is a serious risk that nobody will even open your application.** If one of your recommenders knows someone at MIT, either personally or professionally, ask them to send a quick email (or have a hallway conversation at a conference) saying "Hey, we have this great student <NAME> who's applying to your department; you should take a look!" Sending such an email yourself is unlikely to help. CS professors get *tons* of emails from random students at unknown universities; we call it "spam". The top students from the various IITs have these contacts.
You need some strategy. **All else being equal, it is harder to gain admission to top CS PhD programs to study AI than to study other areas.** AI seems to be the default areas for really smart, talented, qualified students who really have no idea what they want to do. Machine learning is either a subset or a superset of AI, depending on your religion. (Theory suffers from the same effect, to a smaller extent.) In your case, you're probably better off emphasizing your interest in ubiquitous computing in your statement. But remember, you need specific and credible technical detail.
Finally, you need luck. Graduate admissions is an inherently random process; **no one** should apply to MIT *expecting* to be admitted. Coming from an unknown university, your chances of admission are smaller than someone *with exactly the same application* coming from a highly-ranked school. Aiming only for MIT is foolish; limiting yourself to top-20 departments may be foolish as well. Don't rob yourself of opportunities!
After all, your *real* goal is to do great research, not to get into a top-20 program. Right?
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Getting into a top-20 university with a GPA of 7.1 from WBUT is an **unrealistic goal**. Instead of trying to get into a phd directly you should think getting a M tech degree first in India. I'll suggest that you should sit for the GATE examination and take admission for M tech in *old* IITs or IISc. Once you're in IITs or IISc, maintain a *very good gpa* and try to do some very good research.
To just give you a hint how difficult it is, even students from IISc (which is the best institute in India) with GPA of 6.5/8 with publications don't get easy admissions in top-10 programs.
After getting your Mtech from IITs or IISc you will be in a much much better position to apply for Top-20 phd programs in Computer Science. Many faculty members of IITs and IISc have got their phds from top-20 universities. So, they can give you very good letters of recommendation as well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It comes down to funding in the UK at least for all but the most prestigious Universities.
Being able to pay the (Non EU band) UK fees does give you preferential treatment despite the protestations to the contrary.
Edinburgh is one of the top Universities in the world for AI and on my (MSc AI) course we had numerous Indian students, one of them was from an IIT, the rest from middling Indian Universities. Did you try Edinburgh?
One of them is currently in Mumbai working and I'm sure could give you some advice, could twitter you his cell#.
As for the *"After all, your real goal is to do great research, not to get into a top-20 program. Right?"*
I'd disagree. A top program indicates excellent teaching and the fostering of a good Research environment and great resources as well as far better post-doc opportunities - you will likely not get this at Podunk U.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I will share my story, it is somehow related. I got my BSc and MSc from a very average university in the Middle East (my GPA in BSc was below 2.7!!). So, of course I was conditionally admitted into the MSc program and by the time I graduated (2.5 years later), I had to work REALLY HARD and by then I was co-author of couple of journal and conference articles. When I started applying for PhD, I contacted many professors and applied in US and Canada but got rejections from most universities (although I had high TOEFL and GRE scores).
Before I finished my MSc, my adviser has come up with this idea. To sent me to attend a conference to present my MSc research because he knew that some professors are going to be there. I went and met many of the professors that I have contacted by email (and never got a reply from). To be honest, they did not remember me as they receive 10s of emails from other students on a daily basis. Some have even told that they don't go over them.
With couple of these professors who seemed interested in my MSc research, I have discussed my research interests as well as my BSc gpa and school issue. It turned out that it is risky to accept students with my gpa. The professor has to justify his decision somehow to the graduate committee. So, after one of these professors who saw my presentation, and knew that I was a co-author in couple of publication, said that he would go over my application one he gets back to his Uni. Few weeks later, I emailed him again and it turned out that the graduate committee would not admit me and asked me to redo my GRE and TOEFL to get higher scores! I did that, and finally got admitted! You should know that my school is top 50 in my field (civil engineering), my adviser is very well known, I got fully funded too, and I'm about to finalize my PhD!!
This is the moral of the story;
* Get publications (its one of the only things you can control after you graduate, its too late to fix GPA or school name)
* Contacts matter! Attend conferences and get in touch with people
* NEVER GIVE UP!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/08 | 722 | 3,049 | <issue_start>username_0: It is quite common (in some areas) to see the reference to the paper, which is cited as "to appear" or "in prepapation" but never actually appeared. Such citations are treated in the same way as references to unpublished results, conference talks, etc.
However, this approach doesn`t really work for references to preprints. The results *are* published. The problem is that old preprints (say, from 1985) are now inaccessible, they are often not digitized.
So, it is not clear how to treat such old preprints and papers based on results from them: should I believe the authors citing it or consider it as non-existent?<issue_comment>username_1: You should try to track down the preprint. Having to track it down is annoying, but it's usually not hard to do by asking around. If your friends don't have a copy, and the author can no longer be contacted, then you should feel free to write to someone who has cited the preprint to ask if they know where to find a copy. (You can also try the author's collaborators, thesis advisor, students, etc.) When I've done this, it has generally led pretty quickly to a copy, and I've always found one eventually, even for unpublished work from 40+ years ago. If necessary, you can also do things like post online requesting a copy from anyone who has one, but this is typically not necessary.
If you can't find a copy, I would suggest giving the citations you have seen the benefit of the doubt and mentioning the preprint in your paper; it's possible that the citations are mistaken, but not likely. If you can't verify the claims, you can note that you have not been able to track down a copy, but it is cited in X, Y, and Z. (You should only say this if you have seriously tried to locate one but failed.)
For some purposes, seeing the preprint doesn't really matter. For example, you may be citing it merely to assign credit, in a situation where all the factual content can be obtained from elsewhere in the literature. In that case, it's perfectly reasonable to follow the consensus in the field about credit, without worrying about investigating it yourself.
On the other hand, if your work depends on the actual content of the preprint in a way that cannot be verified without a copy, then you really need to track one down. Some people may be lazy about this, but that's not a responsible scholarly approach.
The most frustrating situation is when you're told that something you've discovered may be previously known, but you are unable to access the paper that might contain it. In this case you need to try especially hard to find a copy, to counteract your natural incentive to give up and decide the paper doesn't exist or isn't relevant.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While I completely agree with Anonymous Mathematicial, it is generally acceptable in my field to say "Jones found x (1945, cited in Smith 1985)." This makes it clear that you did not verify the information (from Jones) yourself but someone else (Smith) did claim it to be true.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/09 | 578 | 2,372 | <issue_start>username_0: I have contacted a professor (in Europe) informally and asked for a PhD position. She answered in positive manner and asked for a CV.
What should I include?
Do people in academia care about the usual 2-page restriction?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally I would say No, people do not put restrictions on CVs unless specifically asking for it.
In a case such as the one you decribe you should send a complete CV that lists everything that can be meriting for the position you will apply for. The following would be of interest:
1. A brief description of your drive and interest to pursue a PhD
2. Course work includig grades
3. Scientific/equivalent experience is a given of course.
4. Any publications and scientific/equivalent reports you have written. If you have some significant report/thesis that you have written during your education, you can list that as well. I would say that any report longer than, say, 10 pages of text might be useful to list. In such cases you should perhaps add inwhat context (Course) the text was written. In the end what a person looking for a PhD position will be looking for is someone who can successfully complete work and write it up in written form.
5. Scientific/equivalent presentations in a public context, open department seminar, scientific meeting etc.
6. Any academic work experience such as working inlabs etc.
7. General work experience. This can be listed to highlght work experience of any kind. This shows how active you are.
8. Anything else that you think will be meriting.
If you have written a paper (thesis) of some sort, provide a copy. Only one, the most important though. If you do not have one that is fine, no one would expect you to have written much.
Despite the length of the list try to make it brief and clear so that it can be assessed with ease. ry to find a good layout that make sthe structure easy to see.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Someone else had mentioned this on a related question here: the words "curriculum vitae" [are taken from the Latin](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curriculum_vitae) for "course of my life". So there's not much point in a page restriction :), unlike a corporate resume, which is often required to be one page or one sheet.
As for what you should put in it, Peter's answer is very comprehensive.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/09 | 1,476 | 6,565 | <issue_start>username_0: If someone is a reviewer and recommends major revisions to a medical journal paper, the review can be quite lengthy. (e.g., list of 10-15 points to work on)
On the other hand, how detailed should be the rejection review. Are you expected to provide more than 2 paragraphs justification for the rejection?
Is there any study on length of reviews that reject the paper. I would guess it would be most likely under 2 paragraphs of text. Is that correct?<issue_comment>username_1: It should be long enough that the shortcomings of the paper are immediately obvious to the editor and the authors, but not too long that it becomes your own little personal project, sucking away your valuable time.
You can't really give a generic quantitative value for the length of the rejection review — I've rejected papers with 1 paragraph when I find that the premise/assumption for the work done in the paper is fundamentally flawed and the authors have have insufficient background and/or proceeded without knowing/addressing it at all. In other words, there's no point in me saying anything more when it is clear from the second section that everything that follows in the paper is junk (and I'm not going to spend my time on junk). On the other hand, I've also written 3 page rejection reviews when I felt that the topic was good, the authors have a basic grasp of the subject, but for other reasons such as inferences from insufficient data, sloppy writing, insufficient background/literature, incorrect methodology, etc., the paper had to be rejected as is (some journals allow for a resubmission with major overhaul).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not in a medical field and my experience is limited to being a reviewer for a good journal in my field (computing and information science) for the past 2 years. I am also not aware of any studies on journal reject recommendation lengths so my answer is **anecdotal** and **personal**. With this disclaimer, I would like to say that the true answer is probably, **it depends.**
Personally, I have always given a list of points where I have found a paper lacking and elaborated upon them in great detail. Even if the paper is really bad, i.e from the introduction itself you can make out that you are going to recommend a reject for it, I think it my duty provide as much honest and constructive feedback that I possibly can. This is because peer reviewing comes under the third pillar of the academic tripod - **service** (with the other two being **teaching** and **research**). Maybe its because I am not a very experienced reviewer or I only review 1-2 papers at a time or I have more time than most to devote to this. This has been my personal, *limited* experience. I do not think that one can generalize here.
I am sure others will weigh in on this in meaningful ways.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: A rejection *recommendation* should contain a strong and clear motivaton for what is failing in the reviewed manuscript (MS). Since it is not up to the reviewer to make decisions, any review will be a recommendation to an editor. Therefore, a review of the MS should be made to point out the perceived shortcomings of the MS. A review which essentially contains only a recommendation to reject is most likely not considered by the editor since it will be unclear why such a decision should be made.
So as a reviewer you should make a normal review and point out the weaknesses of the MS.
An editor should normally make sure a MS is ready for review before sending it out for review, but mistakes may happen. I think it is fair to leave detailed comments and focus on the larger issues that you think makes the MS unpublishable.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: *Short answer:* I think it is very disrespectful (or not good) to reject a paper by writing one single paragraph. If a reviewer thinks that there are obvious flaws that cannot be described clearly, then the reviewer shall simply not review the paper.
**The reviewer may have not understood the paper well:** Personally, many times I get a first negative impression of a paper. I try then to write a summary of the paper. Then I realize that "Oh the author meant this !" or "Oh, this actually works !" -- this usually lead me to realize at the end that the paper is good.
**The authors spent a lot of time writing the paper (they are looking for constructive comments most of the time):** From another point of view, put yourself in the authors shoes. They have spent a lot of time (obviously) writing the paper. They are smart people (otherwise, they would have not reached this level to write a paper). Then obviously, there is something to get from them. If the reviewer thinks that this is not enough, then strong comments should be written. In any case, a reviewer should spend a relatively long period of time in each page of the paper.
**The reviewer may not have treated the problem from all perspectives**:
Note also that - in some cases - the reviewer may have experienced the problem from one single perspective, whereas the paper attacks the problem from a different perspective. Treating a problem with a different perspective is the best way to solve the problem IMHO. It only enriches the literature.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I would say that it is highly field dependent and also dependent on how long the manuscript itself is. A 3 page short note is going to have a longer revision/rejection comment than a 50 page monograph almost by definition.
What I've noticed is that in practice there is almost no difference between a "major revisions" and "rejection" comment except for the final recommendation by the author. The purpose of a review is supposed to be to show the author where . If a manuscript is rejected (say, because it was submitted to a journal that is not high-impact enough or contains major flaws that could theoretically be rectified), it is still very helpful to the authors to know *why* it is rejected so they can revise their manuscript accordingly if they plan to resubmit.
A short rejection note could also be interpreted as the reviewer could not be bothered enough to read the entire manuscript. Whereas a long rejection note shows that you read the paper and the problems are extensive enough that the manuscript cannot be salvaged through revision. The way you get around the potential downside of your most salient points potentially being lost is to put your main criticisms up front and in the first paragraph if possible.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/09 | 1,207 | 4,663 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently working on a paper that challenges some long-standing practices within my field, but am questioning how to title the paper. Basically, the old view in the research field is "we do Y instead of better method X, because X takes too long." We show that X is usually just as fast as Y, and often is actually faster.
Given the fact that we're taking what could be a "controversial" stance, does it make sense to put the controversial idea directly in the title, or should it be saved for the abstract.
Basically, the question is if a "traditional" title, such as:
>
> Using New Method X to Improve Solving Problem Y
>
>
>
is preferable to directly mentioning the issue in the title:
>
> Using New Method X Makes Assumption Z Obsolete.
>
>
>
Or is finding a title that suggests superiority without questioning relevance a satisfactory compromise?<issue_comment>username_1: It might be viewed as incivil to refer to someone else's work as "obsolete", whether or not one could defend such a claim. An editor or referee might object to the title, too, and, perhaps even be subliminally biased against your result because of a too-aggressive title.
That is, "provocative" in the sense of more-vividly-descriptive, without too-direct negativism about prior work, might be a very good thing. But I think if "provocative" too much means "antagonistic", the net would be counterproductive and regrettable.
Asserting that you've made progress is already a bit aggressive, suggesting, as is inevitable, that previous work is being superceded (even if still relevant as some sort of historical/dialectic record). My own taste is that winners can afford to be generous.
Edit: in light of edits to the question... I'd still encourage a sort of "innocent" -seeming, or almost-apologetic seeming, self-description. My point would be that people who understand the situation will see the implications of even a very-modest statement. Descriptiveness is good, yes, but perhaps not "judgemental" phrases.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Or is finding a title that suggests superiority without questioning relevance a satisfactory compromise?
>
>
>
Supplementing Paul's fine answer, I agree that if by "provocative" you are directly attacking someone else, then you should not do it. Be provocative in stating the benefits of your method. Ignore the inferior method in your title.
You should also include a descriptive subtitle so that we know what your paper is about.
For example, [this paper](http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ma400123r) has the title "Sequence Matters: Modulating Electronic and Optical Properties of Conjugated Oligomers via Tailored Sequence". The first two words are provocative, but not antagonistic. They suggest that those who might believe that sequence does not matter are incorrect, but it does not say so explicitly, nor does it specifically accuse any previous research/method of being deficient. It is followed by a descriptive title that then tells you what the paper is about.
So, in your case, you might go for something more like
>
> "Simplifying the Solution to Problem Y: A New Metric-Based Analytical Methodology for Enumerating the Variance in Substandard Models."
>
>
>
The first part of the title gets at what you want (that previous solutions to Problem Y are not as good as yours) without specifically targeting any previous method. Save that for the body of your paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A significant fraction of papers in theoretical computer science describe results of the form "we describe an algorithm for problem Y that is faster than every other algorithm known." But it is *very* rare, and would be considered quite rude, for the *title* of such a paper to specifically call out a previous method as "obsolete", especially if that previous methods was strongly associated to a single person or group. In fact, I know of ony one example: <NAME>'s seminal paper "[Gaussian elimination is not optimal](http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FBF02165411.pdf)", which was published centuries after Gauss was safely dead.
Provocative/evocative titles are fine. Challenging conventional wisdom is great. Insulting your colleagues, not so much.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with the other answers that "obsolete" is too confrontational. You could still directly address the issue in the title, though. How about something like:
>
> Using New Method X challenges Assumption Z
>
>
>
or
>
> Using New version of Method X challenges assumptions about problem Y
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/10 | 1,470 | 6,308 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a student doing my Masters (in Computer Science). I am much interested in Ph.D and I know to do Ph.D I really need to read and understand a lot of papers. (I also know that its not all about reading papers, but doing something new and useful) but I find difficult to understand papers, especially mathematical. There are lots of things (like bloom filters, k-means algorithms, and a lot lot much more terminologies) which we, normally, don't encounter (except if you are a Ph.D or doing one) but are really crucial to understand papers.
I am not very good at understanding such stuff (atleast quickly, if given time I can but it takes time). Are there people like me who have done/are doing a Ph.D and had the same problem? If yes, how do you overcome it?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think very many people come into academia with the ability to parse tons of math-heavy articles quickly. It's a skill that develops over time from reading lots of papers, asking someone in the know to help you understand confusing parts, and getting through relevant coursework that will build up your skills and intuition. If it's a matter of speed of getting through things, that will undoubtedly improve in time. If it's a matter of you simply not understanding them at all, then you may want to reconsider your options before diving into a PhD.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The good news is that you have a good 4-6 years of time to learn how to process that sort of material, and you aren't expected to be able to do it immediately. A professor once told me (about physics papers, but it translates into mathematical and CS papers fairly well) that eventually you start to read the math-heavy parts a bit like music -- you see familiar patterns, and you get the general idea without having to dig deep into the details.
Additionally, you'll find that the more classes you take, and the more reading you do really does prepare you for that next paper and that next step. You'll find that as you start specializing on a particular topic, most of the papers in your topic will become easier to read, simply because you have the experience and have gained the knowledge about the particulars over time. Furthermore, you'll start coming up with your own ideas in the subject, and this just happens to be the goal of graduate school!
>
> There are lots of things (like bloom filters, k-means algorithms, and a lot lot much more terminologies) which we, normally, don't encounter...but are really crucial to understand papers.
>
>
>
The beauty is that you will start encountering them more, and you'll start understanding them more and more as you continue your education.
To answer your particular question,
>
> Are there people like me who have done/are doing a Ph.D and had the same problem?
>
>
>
I still have difficulty getting through math-heavy papers (in CS), but I either re-read sections closely until I figure it out, or I ask someone to help, or I simply move on and hope that the rest of the paper fills in the details. I don't expect to understand everything technical that I read, but it becomes easier over time to get what you need out of a particular paper even if you don't get each and every detail.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Start by not reading papers straight through. Most research papers are difficult to follow if you read through start to finish without a loooot of context.
Normally, I read them in approximately this order to begin with:
* Abstract/introduction
* Conclusion/summary
* Future Work
* Results
* Methods
You want to understand what the paper is about first. Generally speaking, unless I know a topic well, the beginning section doesn't do a good job answering the, "what is the point of the next X pages" but a conclusion and summary do. Future work helps me understand, "why is this research even relevant" and then going backwards results helps me understand what they did, and then, once I have context, I read through methods.
Honestly, too, I don't care about understanding detailed methods unless I see a value in understanding them. Reading for the sake of reading is hard, so I "incentivize" myself by showing "oh, there is value in understanding the details of what they did!" and basically trick myself by how I read through things.
Depending on how well I must understand a paper sometimes I stop early in that process or reread sections, etc.
---
In addition to this, make sure you don't read every paper word for word. You don't have to.
Also determine if you are able to read on your computer or if you need to print them off. Some people cannot effectively read on a computer. Some can. Find out your personal abilities here.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If it helps, I was two years' into a full time research degree in psychology (no courses) in which I read all day long and one day I suddenly realised that I was reading an economics book with very little effort. I could read! I still feel the excitement. You do just get better and better but it is like going to the gym - constant application is needed.
Writing took much longer to get easier and I strongly recommend that you make a habit of writing daily. Make sure you always have a writing project on the go and add something every day, no matter how bad. Get a calendar; cross off the days; and don't break the chain. You needn't spend long - under an hour will do. But constant application is the key.
If you are lucky, you will have mentors who demand papers from you. It is a lot easier to write if you have deadlines. But if not, start a blog and start building up a portfolio. The feeling of pressing the publishing button and seeing your blog grow makes up for disinterested supervisors.
Stick with it - in few years you will marvel at the ease with which you find your way around 'heavy' material.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I have found that reading papers of a specific topic within my research, then looking at Google Scholar to track down similar articles helps. I always have a relevant dictionary handy and write down questions related to the topic that I am not to sure about for follow up.
Taking regular breaks to reflect on the information is also useful.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/05/10 | 927 | 3,916 | <issue_start>username_0: I want to submit a paper for an ACM conference and I see that there are two dates like this:
Full Papers
Abstracts due: May 10, 2013
Papers due: May 17, 2013
The issue is that I am still working in tabulating the results from my experiments and I do not think that I will reach the deadline of May the 10th. Can I skip the presentation of the Abstract and submit the full paper on the other date? or should I prepare the abstract and only submit that in the first date?
Any advice will be great, thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: The point of having of an abstract submission first is for the organisers to have a rough idea of the number of submissions and organise a bidding for the reviewers ([Why do some conference have an "abstract submission" before the "paper submission"?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/7843/102)).
Of course, it depends on the organisers of the conference, but if you don't submit an abstract, you might not be able to submit the full article later on. You can always submit an abstract first, and then withdraw your submission if you cannot make it by the full paper deadline. So you haven't much to lose in submitting an abstract first.
If you don't submit the abstract, you can always try to submit the full paper by the final deadline by contacting the conference organisers and explain why you weren't able to submit the abstract first, however, note that pretty much all authors are in the same situation, in that the paper might not be finalised by the abstract deadline.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: No.
---
It's a deadline. Follow it.
Program committees ask for abstracts early to streamline the reviewing process. Asking them to make a special exception for you because you're not ready yet is unfair to the program committee, who would have to do extra work (however small) to accommodate your late submission, and to the hundreds of authors who got their abstracts in on time.
>
> The issue is that I am still working in tabulating the results from my experiments
>
>
>
The tabulated results of your experiments are not going to appear in your abstract anyway; only the *conclusions* from your experiments will. If you don't know yet what those conclusions will be, you're not ready to submit. So don't. There's always another conference.
**But!** Remember that you are allowed to revise your abstract in the week before the paper submission deadline. It is perfectly acceptable to submit a tentative abstract, which describes your results **in enough detail to assign reviewers**, and then include a more detailed/updated abstract in your paper submission. If your conference is using EasyChair or HotCRP, you can change your abstract in the electronic submission form, and the committee will no longer see the old abstract.
If you make **significant** changes to your abstract in the paper submission, you risk angering the program committee members who were assigned your paper, who could (legitimately) reject your paper without review. So don't do that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: ### It's very simple: just ask the contact person. Don't assume.
Email the contact person listed on the conference website (e.g. the PC chair), and proceed according to their reply:
* If they *answer "yes"*, you *can skip* the abstract.
* If they *answer "no"*, you *can't skip* the abstract.
* If they *don't answer* and there are only a couple of days or so left until the abstract deadline, you *can't skip* the abstract.
Note: The *reason* for abstract submission deadlines is usually to allow the PC to effectively distribute the refereeing workload amongst themselves. For this reason, changes to the abstract after the abstract deadline are typically allowed (that is, unless you switch it to a completely different kind of paper). Again, though, that's also something you need to confirm in advance.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/10 | 1,527 | 5,902 | <issue_start>username_0: ### The question
When a journal (such as one of the Nature family) asks for information about authors' contributions, what is the most effective way to answer this, to ensure that the co-authorship is assigned as intended, and to ensure that reality is represented: that **the work is a product of the intellectual environment of the whole team; and that all members have contributed in various degrees to the analytical methods used, to the research concept, and to the experiment design**. Is what I've just written there sufficient, or is there a more judicious phrasing that is accepted by heavyweight journal publishers such as the Nature Group?
### The context
The primary context is publications from a team that works on the principle that all members of the team are to be named authors on all papers coming out of the team.
**I'm very specifically looking for answers from editors who handle such papers; or from members of teams with similar rules.** Answers from others are of course possible, but I'd value direct personal experience.
Here's the [Vancouver Group's (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) statement on the subject](http://www.icmje.org/ethical_1author.html):
>
> Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.
>
>
> When a large, multicenter group has conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct responsibility for the manuscript. These individuals should fully meet the criteria for authorship/contributorship defined above, and editors will ask these individuals to complete journal-specific author and conflict-of-interest disclosure forms. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should clearly indicate the preferred citation and identify all individual authors as well as the group name. Journals generally list other members of the group in the Acknowledgments. The NLM indexes the group name and the names of individuals the group has identified as being directly responsible for the manuscript; it also lists the names of collaborators if they are listed in Acknowledgments.
>
>
> Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship.
>
>
> All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed.
>
>
> Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content.
>
>
>
**The caveats**:
1. My field is not medicine: I've used the Vancouver Group's guidelines, as I haven't yet found any in my field.
2. note that this is emphatically not about the ethics, pros and cons of such a rule. If you want to discuss that, please do so in [chat](http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/2496/academia). I may join you there as time allows
### Related literature:
* [Author contributions audit](http://blogs.nature.com/nautilus/2007/11/post_12.html), by <NAME> on the Nature Nautilus authors' blog, lists example contributors' satements
* [<NAME> discusses "Authorship Credits"](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736%2805%2964090-1)
* [Academia and Clinic, by Yank & Rennie](http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3407): Disclosure of Researcher Contributions: A Study of Original Research Articles in The Lancet
* and lots more at the [US Council of Science Editors](http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3407)<issue_comment>username_1: If there is a requirement to list the contribution of each author, it seems the ethical way to handle it is, well, to list the contribution of each author. If some authors did not contribute directly to the paper, you should state that.
It is unethical to try to conceal that some authors did not make a direct contribution. Please note: Your team policy is what it is, and I'm not trying to judge the ethics of your team's policy. I'm just saying that, whatever your team's policy is, you must disclose it forthrightly, without evasion. That's exactly the point of disclosure requirements!
(If you're not comfortable stating your team's policy explicitly, that might be a hint that it's time to consider changing the policy -- but until then, you must disclose it frankly and honestly.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your phrasing is fine, but you could be more explicit. Let's say there are four authors: ABC, DEF, GHI, and JKL. You might say something like
>
> ABC, DEF, GHI, and JKL designed the study, developed the methodology, collected the data, performed the analysis, and wrote the manuscript.
>
>
>
It seems nitpicky, silly, and egregious to go through a paper that may contain dozens of experiments/simulations and list which person did which. That would be akin to noting who wrote each sentence. However, if there is a key component that only a subset of your team participated on, then, as username_1 suggests, it would be unethical not to list it that way:
>
> ABC, DEF, GHI, and JKL designed the study, developed the methodology, performed the analysis, and wrote the manuscript. ABC and GHI collected the data.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You can use the [Contributor Roles Taxonomy (or CRediT)](https://casrai.org/?s=credit) approach as a reference to state what was the role of each co-author in your paper. Journals like Plos ONE are adopting this approach or using a modified version. You can read more about this [here](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/leap.1210).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/05/10 | 1,177 | 4,919 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a 2nd year undergraduate student in Aerospace Engineering, in India. I am really willing to go into Academia as a researcher. I am specifically interested in Aerospace Controls. Some points to consider :
1) I love the fast internet access in university, so that I can research and learn all I want.
2) I have read up a few research papers regarding error reduction in GPS measurements, when I was doing a Supervised Project under a professor. Reading research papers are gruelling, but after 2-3 days of bending your mind over them and finally understanding what the author intended to say, I feel elated.
In this specific case, I read up a few algorithms and got excited on the prospect of developing my own algorithms for error reductions.
3) I have a fair academic standing with a cumulative grade point of greater than 9 out of 10
So I would like a few pointers on what I can do now, as an undergraduate student to prepare for my PhD.<issue_comment>username_1: As an undergraduate student, the best thing you can do to help your admissions case is to *get involved in research*. This will allow you to demonstrate that you have the capability to do good research, which is one of the biggest things admissions committees and individual professors are looking for when choosing among applicants. Maintaining a solid academic record is also useful, and having an understanding of the literature in the field you're interested in is also good. However, direct experience will let you see if academia really is what you want to do or not.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Here are a couple of pointers that are distinct from [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9913/i-am-a-2nd-year-undergraduate-student-what-should-i-do-now-to-prepare-for-my-ph/9914#9914) that **research is the most important thing you can be doing to prepare for and to be competitive for graduate school**:
1. Read as many papers as you can from high profile conferences and journals in your field. Even if you don't understand everything right now, you'll start to get a feel for where the cutting edge is, and and also about how to write good papers. You'll probably also start to see which schools publish the most papers, and if you're looking for top programs, these are probably the ones.
2. Take hard classes, and get good grades. Eventually, if you have the right prerequisites, try to take a graduate-level course or two and excel in it/them.
3. Start talking to your professors about graduate school, and try to form relationships where you will be comfortable asking for letters of recommendation. They all went to graduate school, and some will have good advice on your path. If you are doing research for a professor, especially make sure you discuss your future plans with him/her.
4. Learn [LaTeX](http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwilkins/LaTeXPrimer/). Although this seems like a little thing, you'll certainly find it helpful to be competent in LaTeX during graduate school.
5. Try to track down former students from your school who went on to graduate school in a similar field, and ask them about their experiences, and for suggestions about applying.
6. If your research leads to good results, attempt to publish those results. Even if you get rejected, you've at least gone through the sometimes-obtuse submission process, and it is a worthwhile exercise.
7. Start looking into scholarship and fellowship opportunities now. Even if you don't apply for a couple of years, you'll know what you may qualify for, and can start tailoring your application materials now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on where you're getting your PhD, but in countries (like the Netherlands) where a PhD position is treated like a job that you interview for, I would say *get published*. This is encompasses username_1's answer, but I would focus on the specific goal of getting a paper published. Every student project you do, ask yourself what kind of results would make your professor say "we should publish this". This has the following advantages:
* Publishing a paper takes some psychological development. You need to be able to deal with the drudgery of finishing a project without procrastinating, and getting it to a certain level of quality. If you can show that you've already mastered this skill, you will be a much more valuable PhD student.
* It forces you to work to a higher standard, so you'll learn more, and you'll focus on the details that are important for research work.
* It gives the person evaluating you for a position something to look at that is much more informative than a grade list or a CV.
Of course, if the threshold to PhD-ship is an exam rather than an interview, you should study with the exam in mind, but the goal of publishing while you're still an undergrad will help you be a better PhD student once you get in.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/10 | 477 | 2,056 | <issue_start>username_0: As for reference letters, I have come across distinct policies.
Some recommend to only give a reference letter for a particular application - it might be tailored to the particular position which the applicant soughts for.
Other do not seem to have a problem with providing generic reference letters. I personally prefer this one, because it is clearly less work for all parties involved.
So, which kind of reference is appropiate to ask for from your supervisor? Which one is socially accepted? (I am a former student that needs a letter of reference from his former professor).<issue_comment>username_1: It can be reasonable to ask for letters tailored to specific *kinds of jobs* but unreasonable to ask for letters tailored to *specific jobs* assuming that you're applying to many jobs. Many people are already writing dozens of letters a year, so writing say 10 different letters for one of those people is clearly unreasonable, but two could be fine. For example, if you are applying to both tenure-track liberal arts jobs and research jobs then you may want to ask certain recommenders for two different letters (e.g. for your teaching letter, or if your thesis advisor co-supervised an undergraduate research project with you).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me answer the question in the title.
>
> Should I keep generic reference letters from my supervisors?
>
>
>
**No.** You should not keep copies of reference letters, generic or otherwise. Your supervisors should send whatever letters they write directly to the jobs to which you apply. Those letters should never pass through your hands at all.
It's entirely up to your references what kind of letter to write. You should always ask for strong letters individually tailored to each position you apply for, but there's no way to *make* anyone do that, or even to check whether they have. Ultimately, you just have to trust the people you ask to do a good job, which implies that you should only ask people you trust to do a good job.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/10 | 2,435 | 10,159 | <issue_start>username_0: Scenario:
* Lecturer tells students six sections of material to study for the exam, but the exam only covers two of those sections.
* Practice exams are completely different to actual exam.
* Answers to the exam are in the lecture notes, but not the notes pointed to by the lecturer.
Questions:
* **Is it ethical for a lecturer to mis-indicate exam study material by instructing students to study material which is not on the exam?**
* **What are reasonable expectations regarding the relationship between what a lecturer says is assessable and exam content?**<issue_comment>username_1: I will address the final question you ask—if it's fair for instructors to write an exam but point to other material to study.
The primary ethical issue here is the question of intent: **why** did the instructor tell you to review the particular material. If this was an *intentional* effort to mislead students, and to feed them "false" information in order to catch them unprepared, I would say that it is somewhat unethical. (In other words, if you were told you wouldn't be responsible for something on the exam when the instructor *knew* it would be, that's wrong.)
However, if the instructor gave "recommendations"—along the lines of "it might be good to know X, Y, and Z"—then there's really nothing wrong with that. Telling you *exactly* what to do defeats the purpose of a university education, which is to learn **how to learn**! Ultimately, the instructor should not be spoonfeeding you information which you then regurgitate on the final exam. And I would further argue that if all you're doing is memorizing information, as you suggest, then you're also not really accomplishing much, since such information is very likely to be "dumped" from memory once the semester is over.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's in the gray area between unethical and simply poor teaching pedagogy, if it happened as you described. (My typical experience is that neither the instructor nor the students\* quite have an accurate account of what happened. I have sat in on enough classes as a disinterested party to notice this....)
The reason it is poor teaching pedagogy is that you reward students who ignore you, and penalize those who do what you ask. "Review X" might indeed be good advice for mastering the material, but if you do this before an exam it's implicit that this is going to not just help you with the material but also help you with the exam. Not *everything* the lecturer mentions might be on the exam--after all, the exam has length limits--but if it's almost a complete mismatch, the lecturer has just badly undermined their credibility. Maybe they only mentioned the parts that they thought students might overlook (knowing the rest is so obvious it "doesn't bear mentioning", perhaps!), but it still speaks poorly of their judgment and the value of paying attention to them. Even if they honestly wanted to improve the students' knowledge, this isn't the way to do it.
It is unethical if it gets to the point where it's downright duplicitous; where the lecturer knows full well that the advice is bad advice for the exam (rather than e.g. just advising that the students cover everything, or not really knowing what they'll pick out to cover on the exam), and is using students' drive to do well on an exam to get them to study material that the lecturer for some reason feels is very important to know and yet not important enough to test. This is about the same as holding a big gold coin casually in one's hand while asking someone, "Hey, if you give me $20, I'll give you a gold coin!", then collecting their money and pulling out a pinhead-sized gold coin and giving it to them. It's duplicitous even if the duplicity occurs entirely within the realm of inference/implicature. I wouldn't necessarily assume any particular lecturer was doing this instead of just being a bad teacher, but if they were it would be unethical.
However, randomly sampling from all topics covered is a fair and even expected way to deal with having more material to cover than can reasonably be assessed during a test. It's not *completely* fair in that it is an error-prone measurement of student ability (people who particularly struggled with those areas but excelled at the others will do anomalously badly, and vice versa for those who had problems elsewhere but got what was tested), but alas, in a group instruction setting it's extremely difficult to be completely fair. Mostly fair is about as much as you can hope for (on a reasonable budget). From what you've described, I cannot distinguish the lecturer's behavior from this, so I would tend to give them the benefit of the doubt (and tend to give you the benefit of the doubt that you haven't yet encountered this sort of style and thought about why it may be necessary). And if there's another exam to come, well, there's a good chance that some other portion of the material will be covered then (this is also extremely common practice).
\*(Aside: when teaching, I have had students honestly come up to me and complain that an exam is "nothing like" a sample exam when the sample contained a question analogous to "If Jim has five oranges and Sally has two oranges, and they share equally between themselves and Jane, how many oranges does each get" and the actual exam contained, "If a puppy has a bowl with two cups of water, a kitten has one with one cup of water, and they and two lambs all drink the water, sharing it equally, how much water will each drink?". In this case, the problem is that the student is too fixated on the particulars--"there's no Sally! No oranges!"--to actually know the material at all. So of course, when the irrelevant details change, the student is completely flummoxed, and yet the test is a good test of their skill, and the practice test should have been good practice. Part of learning how to learn is understanding how not to become one of these students--understanding when you're capturing the material at the right level of generality and with the right number of details. A really good teacher will help bring this out, but it's really difficult to teach, so it's mostly up to you.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If the instructor telling his/her students *"You better know this material, because it is going to be on the test"* when, in fact, the material is not going to be on the test then I would say that it is unethical.
In situations like this, examination of consciousness and of motives is a way to come to conclusions about whether or not something is **ethical**, or **moral** for that matter. Lecturer's are in a position of power in that students will listen to them and expect to be able to take what they say at face value. If a lecturer is abusing his student's trust for personal satisfaction it would be unethical.
If, however, a lecturer misleads his students in such a way that they believe all the given material for that period is to be covered on the test - **in an effort to ensure that the students learn everything, with the motive being for the students educational gain** - than I would say that it is not just moral, but a good practice. All too often students try to skate by studying only what will be covered on the test. Making sure your students learn as much as you can, even if it means lying to them about what is on the test, is surely a noble deed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: First and foremost - As a general rule you should expect to need to study all course material for an exam, and be able to apply everything you've learned throughout the course term. This is regardless of anything else.
Now,
>
> Lecturer tells students six sections of material to study for the exam, but the exam only covers two of those sections.
>
>
>
Why did you use the word "but"? You meant to say:
>
> Lecturer indicates six sections of material to study for the exam, and the exam covers two of those sections.
>
>
>
and this is perfectly fine.
>
> Practice exams are completely different to actual exam.
>
>
>
In itself this is not an issue, but if the teacher indicated that the exam will have a similar structure or character as the practice exams, that is unethical. But... did s/he indicate this? Just by pointing you to practice exams you don't have a basis for assuming the next exam will be similar to them.
>
> Answers to the exam are in the lecture notes, but not the notes pointed to by the lecturer.
>
>
>
If they're in the lecture notes, then they're in the notes; what does it matter where the teacher pointed? However, if the lecture notes include a solved practice-problem, and that exact problem appears on the exam, that is at least an undesirable feature of the exam. I'm not sure I'd call it unfair, but it could skew the score distribution by a somewhat arbitrary factor of having looked at another version of the lecture notes.
>
> Is it ethical for a lecturer to mis-indicate exam study material by instructing students to study material which is not on the exam?
>
>
>
Mis-indication of the relevant material for the exam *is* usually unethical, but the second part of your question is not a case mis-indication. It would also be unethical if the material is not part of the course' syllabus.
>
> What are reasonable expectations regarding the relationship between what a lecturer says is assessable and exam content?
>
>
>
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "assessable", but clearly - the exam author can choose to assess just a part of the relevant material or skills, as long as it's a core part, and the narrowing-of-focus is not excessive.
For example, if there are six "equal-sized" subjects of equal importance , and the exam has 20 independent questions, it is reasonable to expect that at least four or five of the six subjects will be touched upon and that no two subjects will take up almost all of the questions. On the other hand, if the exam has two or three longer questions with subsections, it's quite reasonable for each of these to focus on one of the six subjects.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/11 | 930 | 3,827 | <issue_start>username_0: I was reading through a journal article by an author. Let's call him `Author X`. The author while referring to some of his own journal articles cite them as `Author X et al.`, even though `Author X` is not the first author in the cited article. Is this allowed or should it be treated as academic dishonesty?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on how literally you are using the word "cite". If you mean the articles are listed in the bibliography with the authors in a different order from how they were published, or the author order is changed in a formal citation such as "(Author X et al. 1994)" even if the bibliography is correct, then yes, it would be considered dishonesty, because it misrepresents the author listing.
On the other hand, it's possible to give correct formal citations to some papers and then go on to talk about "Author X et al." without actually implying that this represents author order at all; instead, you are just highlighting X among the researchers who have worked on these problems. Overemphasizing a particular author's role could be offensive, but it's not necessarily dishonest in the same sense as misrepresenting the author order on a specific paper. (And it might even be appropriate in some unusual cases. For example, imagine that X has been working in this subfield for many years and has published a dozen papers, each with a different student as first author. If you need a brief way to refer to this group of researchers as a whole, then "X et al." might not be crazy.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The only reason I would use a formulation such as this is if the work being "cited" were multiple works performed by a changing group of members with a "constant" member who was probably the group leader. And, even in that case, I would use the formulation "X and coworkers," rather than "X et al.," to indicate that the it's not a "direct" citation, but a matter of convenience. The reason for this is that it's quite distracting to have to write:
>
> as discussed in A et al. [cite], B et al. [cite], C et al. [cite], A et al. #2 [cite], . . .
>
>
>
when there's a bunch of different references that are all part of the same research effort.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have a hard time seing any other answer than NO, it is not ethical. If the paper referenced is published it is very clear. If one neds to reference an individual other than the first author, it is always possible to quote the name followed by the refeence for (a very hypothetical) example
>
> ... X made the Y analysis (Z et al., yyyy) ...
>
>
>
If the work is unpublished, it typicaly should not be referenced using typical references so then the "personal communication" or whatever for would be pertinent could be given in any way relavant to the particular case.
The main point is of course to give credit where credit is due. so,if it is clear that someone has performed a very specific task (indicated in the paper referenced) then it might be ok to point that out but never to change the original citation which has to match the reference in the reference list, which in turn has to match the published article. So for me exceptions to the general rule are vanishingly few and I have never encountered a case where this has happened either as a reader of journals or as an editor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It is definitely misrepresenting the situation, but I am not sure it is intentional. I met several (where several means a large number) researchers who were not aware that the "et al." phrase can only be used with first authors, and they used it in the meaning of "and his/her coworkers". If the given person's mother tongue is not English, I would say it is more of a mistake than intentional dischonesty.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/11 | 1,325 | 5,388 | <issue_start>username_0: I just passed my dissertation defense. This means there is nothing left but paperwork to get my doctorate. Among the various congratulations I've received a couple have termed me: Dr. My assumption was that I'm not really a doctor until I go through the graduation ceremony, but now I'm wondering. Is there a convention as to when exactly I can call myself Doctor?<issue_comment>username_1: Writing as an Administrator:
It is appropriate to use the title when you are a graduate, ie, *when the degree is conferred* either in notice by letter or by ceremony (which ever comes first). Prior to that your status is that of a graduand. If you've been using the work-title PhD Candidate you might consider changing to PhD Graduand to indicate this status: that you're awaiting conferral but you've met the substantive criteria for fulfillment of your degree. Additional source: [Swinburn on Postnominals](http://www.swinburne.edu.au/studentoperations/graduation/postnominals.html).
Congratulations by the way!
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, Congratulations! Second, in about two weeks you'll forget about the whole issue with when to call yourself a doctor, simply because it will have been overcome by the events of your actual graduation. That is to say: at this point, it doesn't really matter, and no one is going to care one way or another; the gray area between when you pass your defense, and when you are officially conferred the degree is a short, finite time.
The bigger question may be, When **should** you call yourself a doctor (even after graduation)? Or, [What is the proper way to address yourself](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/8291/proper-way-to-address-yourself). I recommend being tactful when considering introducing yourself as "Doctor X," because that can come across as pretentious, and you don't want that as a first impression.
On a lighter note, a professor I know stopped selecting the "Dr." salutation for airline flights after a flight attendant asked her to help with a medical emergency. Her reply to the request was, "unless the medical emergency can benefit from intricate knowledge of computer architecture, I'm not the doctor you're looking for!"
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I defended my final dissertation defense two weeks ago, and my chair congratulated me and called me Dr. Woo! I always thought it was until when the title is conferred in a doctoral commencement, they can call you Dr. But on the contrary, you are called Dr. the moment you pass your dissertation defense.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Quoting <NAME>, "it ain't over till it's over". Just because someone feels the degree has been earned, does not mean it will be conferred. After a successful dissertation defense, the graduand likely has some additional obligations to the institution.
Should you state that you are 'married' just because your wedding is near? Same thing for degrees. You do not have it until you have it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In British universities, the relevant point is when the result of the viva (thesis defence) is published. This usually takes the form of the result being pinned on a board in a corridor somewhere in the adiministration building - I like to think of the corridor being subterranean with the sound of constant dripping water, the only visitor ever to enter being the person who pins the results up. This is normally about a week or so after the viva, if you pass without corrections, or a similar period after the examiners have said that you have corrected the thesis to their satisfaction. Then you can call yourself doctor and have all your bank cards changed! The graduation could be 6 months after you pass, and when you get your certificate the date of the award will be the publication date rather than the date of the graduation ceremony.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: This depends on the country. Luckily there is a [long Wikipedia page dedicated to the use of the Doctor title](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)).
Excerpt:
>
> In the United States, the title Doctor is commonly used professionally by those who have earned a doctorate-level degree.
>
>
>
So in theory you're not a doctor till you get some paper attesting you earned your doctorate-level degree.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: In most German universities, you're not a doctor before you've published the dissertation, typically a book. Another year to make it exciting. But at least you can call yourself <NAME>. (doctor designatus) in the meantime.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: This varies by institution. I haven't heard that attending the actual graduation ceremony is obligatory anywhere, but I haven't checked around. Where I got my degree, the University of Minnesota, the rule was that the degree takes effect on the last day of the month in which all the paperwork gets completed by the candidate and the institution, and there was no obligation to attend the ceremony. But a few years earlier, it was done quarterly rather than monthly.
As to when you can call yourself "Doctor", I would think it depends on the context and purpose. At a party you can tell someone you just finished your Ph.D. In more formal contexts, you can say you finished your Ph.D., to be effective April 31st.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/05/11 | 1,687 | 7,368 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm thinking of hiring a contact/freelance editor to help me improve my paper, before I submit it. I'm looking for someone to perform proofreading and copy editing as well as broader, substantive editing services, to save me some time.
How should I find and select a suitable editor? Should I look specifically for a technical editor with knowledge in my general area, or will any editor be able to help? Does anyone have any recommendations for how to make this most effective?
---
Clarification: the term "editor" is potentially confusing, because it has multiple meanings. The meaning that's likely to jump to your mind is that of an Editor at a journal, but that's not what I'm referring to. Instead, I'm referring to professionals who help with editing manuscripts. Many folks are familiar with copy editing and copy editors; that is actually just one type of editing service, and other editors may offer other editing services (e.g., developmental/comprehensive editing). I'm trying to be a bit more general and not limit this question to just copy editing -- but if you're not familiar with the editing profession, you can think of my usage of the word "editor" as referring to a "copy editor" and you won't be too far off.<issue_comment>username_1: This is probably not going to be an answer you might like specifically but here's what we do.
I am a doctoral student and in our department, it is pretty common for students to iterate pre-submission and post review drafts with each other (especially before the deadlines of major conferences). It works pretty well. I have also seen tenured and un-tenured faculty doing this in our department.
Therefore, my bigger recommendation is, circulate drafts among your own departmental colleagues. Surely someone will give you sanity checks on your submission material?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First, to avoid any confusion, an *editor* is typically a person associated with a journal or a publisher. The purpose of an editor is not to primarily to work on improving a paper but rather to judge if a paper is up to the standards of wherever it is supposed to be published. It seems in your question, you are looking for someone to help you with the writing process. This means you might go very wrong if you contact an editor for the tasks you describe. A *copy editor* and a *proof reader* is usually also part of a publishers chain and the purpose of such persons is to make sure everything adheres to the publishers standards before going into print; they are part of the end of the publishing chain, not the beginning. So, persons professionally working under titles like these are not likely of interest to you at a manuscript stage.
So typically, what you describe you need help with is part of what we all have to do to get published. We all should learn this process through our (primarily graduate) education but, in the end, there will always be room for further improvements for as long as we live. The first source for help should be your peers, or simply friends, in your research environment. They should have enough insight to check the science and general writing aspects. What may be more problematic if not an native English speaker, is language.
In the case of language there are numerous specialists that can be hired to check and correct your paper if that is also what you need. Many publishers have associated such specialists and it is probably necessary to find some service that specializes in scientific writing; remember that threre is much need for other types of translations, legal, fictional literature etc., so that many specialize and may not be suitable for science writing.
So, try your peers, you will probably have a hard time finding a person to hire to proide the services you require, with the exception of language corrections.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: ### How to find an editor
In the UK, [there's the Society for Editing Professionals (SfEP)](http://www.sfep.org.uk/) - get one of their members who meets the criteria for selecting an editor (below). [This search for Advanced SfEP members in academic consultancy](http://www.sfep.org.uk/directory/directory.asp?zoom_query=academic%20consultancy&zoom_cat%5B%5D=0&zoom_per_page=50&zoom_and=1&zoom_sort=0) should give you a lead (disclosure: the editor I work with is on that list). If you're not in the UK, your country may have a similar organisation.
You could also try asking the journal publisher of your choice, as some now keep a list of recommended editors for pre-submission work.
Ask your peers for recommendations too.
If your employer has a department of Research Services or similar, they may be able to recommend someone.
---
### How to select an editor
Here are some criteria for selecting an editor for pre-submission services, based on my own experiences of hiring technical editors over the last 7 years, and working with one as a publishing strategist too over the last year or two. These criteria are in no particular order - I recommend finding someone who meets all of them.
1. Someone with a good track record in technical editing / publishing. Everyone's got to learn some time, and so every new editor needs their first client. But you don't want to be that guinea pig, unless saving money or helping their career along is more important to you than getting the best result. Someone with a track record will already have thir editing-macros / tools and ready, and have streamlined their workflow.
2. A gamekeeper turned poacher. That is, someone who's been an editor on the post-submission side, working within journals. They'll know the rules and the etiquette from both sides. They may even have a helpful network at your target publisher.
3. Someone you can communicate clearly with: you'll only find this by actually doing it, at least via phone / skype / emails / tweets / whatever. Clear quick communication will save you money and give you a better result.
4. Someone who understands your speciality at least enough to get the gist of what's required. As a minimum, that means if you're in the humanities, you want someone from the humanities; if you're in sciences / tech / engineering / maths (STEM), you want someone with a STEM background.
5. Someone fluent in your writing medium. So if you write in LaTeX, you want someone fluent in that. Ditto for MS-Word, LibreOffice, whatever.
If you find might be using a good editor a lot, it's probably worth finding someone who you could develop a longer-term professional relationship with; in that case, pick someone who'd be able to help you develop your publishing strategy over time, too.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You may be able to use "any" editor to help with simple matters of grammatical constructions and general structure and clarity. However, if you require a lot of technical jargon in your paper, you may find it more advantageous to seek out someone who works in your specialty. Otherwise, they may want to change words that have specific meanings in your field.
If your university has a "writing office" or some other service that it offers to students and staff, I would begin by inquiring there. They may either have some professionals on staff who can help out, or provide you with recommendations for professionals in your area.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/12 | 1,358 | 5,622 | <issue_start>username_0: In trying to plan for the future and decide on preferred programs and career paths, I'm trying to figure out the seemingly Byzantine nature of how academic funding sources interact. I am particularly confused about how departmental/institutional funding effect fellowships or grant money.
To give a specific example to illustrate the general point that I'm asking about, consider this [FAQ for Prospective Students](http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/student_info/prospective.html) at Carnegie Mellon, where it is stated anyone accepted into the PhD program can expect their tuition to be paid by the program/waived, and a stipend of ~$24k per year. The page also suggests applying for a fellowship like the [PIER Program](http://www.cmu.edu/pier/program.applic/program.app.html), which states it provides about a $30k stipend + $10k towards tuition. Another possibility would be something like the SMART Scholarship, which provides tuition assistance, stipend, and allows non-interfering fellowships.
This is all well and good individually, but what happens if you get department funding and a fellowship like this PIER program? Does the department keep its funding entirely and you only get the greater of the two? If your tuition is paid because of your position, does the contribution of a fellowship towards tuition just give your school some extra funding but does not effect your financial situation individually? And how does a SMART scholarship factor in?
Please note I'm not solely interested in this limited example (as it would be of interest to so few people), but more generally how this works in academia across programs and institutions. I'm in the US, though surely how this sort of thing works in other countries would be valuable to know anyway.
As a second example, consider something like a SMART scholarship and then getting a TA/RA position (which they allow) which earns tuition remittance. Does the scholarship funding source get the tuition remitted back to them, or does any part of the tuition remittance get returned to the student?
The bottom line is deciding the real affordability of various institutions and living areas if you expect to need significantly more than a single stipend amount (raising a family, helping kids pay for their college, etc), and of course to help to decide if seeking certain scholarships and fellowships has a sufficient potential ROI for the time required to seek them.
Thank you all for any help in unraveling this Gordian knot of academic finance!<issue_comment>username_1: In general, the rule of funding in graduate programs is that external money is used to replace internal money. That is, if your department gives a stipend of, say, $20,000 per year, and you win a fellowship that pays $15,000 per year, the $15,000 will be used to offset part of the $20,000.
However, most departments that I'm aware of will also guarantee that fellowship and grant holders don't suffer relative to their peers by bringing in outside money. That is, they guarantee to make up any shortfall between the value of an external award and the department's standard. (In the sciences and engineering, I would steer clear of any department that *doesn't* have such a policy!) Many departments will even incentivize bringing in outside award fellowships by giving a premium or bonus that supplements the outside award. This might be done either by multiplying the standard award by a percentage (so, for instance your total would be 125% of the department's standard), or by giving a lump sum on top of an outside award (if it exceeds the standard, for instance).
One thing to watch out for, however, are **restrictions** placed on the outside fellowship: your department may have to certify, for instance, that you will *not* be assigned teaching duties or other non-research duties during the fellowship period. If you are unable to attain such a certification, the award may not be given out.
For the PhD phase of a program, the tuition should be covered by the department and the outside fellowship; however, in general the student does *not* receive part of the tuition payment back. In general, the tuition charge is a negotiation between the university and the fellowship program, as this is at the graduate level usually a financial transaction. Also, if the student were to receive the tuition payment which was then forwarded to the school, this could be called taxable income, which would make things very messy for everyone.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The answer is: **it depends**. It depends upon the rules of both fellowships. This will be allowable only if both fellowships allow it.
Often external fellowships will have a "no double-dipping rule". For instance, NSF Fellows are not allowed to receive full funding from an alternate source: if you accept the NSF Fellowship, you can't also accept any other fellowship, including an internal fellowship. However, it may be allowable for NSF Fellows to receive a limited supplement/bonus on top of the NSF Fellowship, as a bonus and thank-you for receiving an external fellowship. Other fellowships will have other rules.
For internal fellowships, typically the intent is that you don't receive both an internal and an external fellowship: external funding replaces internal funding.
None of this is cut-and-dry, and there are exceptions to everything. If you have been offered two fellowships, you should contact both fellowship programs to find out about the rules they impose on fellows; that will tell you what you can and can't do.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/13 | 793 | 3,439 | <issue_start>username_0: I've been asked by a peer-reviewed journal whether I'd be willing to act as an associate editor for them. The question [How to act as an editor?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/935/how-to-act-as-an-editor) has some useful hints as to the tasks associated with that. But I am still wondering how much time these tasks would typically take.
The form where I accept to be an editor allows me to indicate **how many papers per month** I'd be willing to handle, and I am not sure what number to give there. My questions is how much time I should expect to take for each paper in the first or second year as editor?<issue_comment>username_1: I would start by asking the journal rep how many manuscripts (MS) other have agreed to, or what is typical. I would think that is what the journal reps would consider "normal". You probably have a sense of whether they need you for something very specific, in which case a lower number might be quite acceptable. Once you know what they tyically load on their editors, you should think hard about whether you find the workload acceptable. There is usually no guarantee that the workload is evenly distributed unless all editors are able to handle pretty much all submitted MS.
As editor you will likely need to at least browse the MS when you receive it, chase after persons willing to review, read the reviews and the MS carefully to provide feedback to the author, review the authors revisions, poissibly run the MS around again and then make a suggestion or decision on accept/reject. All this is within some time frame and chasing late reviews and authors who do not return revisions will take some time. I can also add that it will be the problematic papers that will take up most of your time, the good ones usually are not difficult to handle. You thus do not know how much time you will spend on any particular MS. A really good one could take half a day in total; a poor may take at least a day or more. So having slightly scared you with this, I will add that the work also has potentially tremendous rewards (reading brand new research and getting in contact with new persons).
So, in short, how many MS per month is really impossible to answer, it will strongly depend on how you feel about the work and how you think you can accommodate the workload in your own time. I will leave you with this slightly unsatisfactory answer, but urge you to try to get a sense of what the journal expects and what they consider normal. You could also ask to how much time they think the workload corresponds.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This varies wildly. It depends on the journal, how many submissions it receives, whether it has a full-time Chief Editor, whether it has one or more senior Editors below the Chief, whether Associate Editors receive any payment, and whether your subdiscipline is a popular one.
I'm an (unpaid) Associate Editor for two journals. For one, I handle about 6 manuscripts per year, for the second, I have been an Assoc Editor for 6 months so far and have yet to receive any submissions (it's a new journal so it isn't receiving many yet, especially not in my subfield). A colleague is an Assoc. Editor for another journal, for which she receives a substantial honorarium, and she handles 15-20 manuscripts each year.
The only way to find out is to ask the Editor who has invited you to join.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/13 | 2,298 | 10,409 | <issue_start>username_0: Lots of professors provide their full papers published by scholarly journals on their personal website (in the university official domain). PDF files of their final papers published by different publishers are available online. However, this is against the copyright transfer agreement, and the authors have no right to distribute their papers publicly. In other words, the authors have the same right as well as others to distribute their own papers publicly, as this is the marketing right of the publisher.
This is clear violation of the US copyright law, like distributing cracked software programs or movies without copyright. Why the university officials do not take action over this copyright violation?
One may say that this is their personal website and they are legally responsible, but if someone distribute an illegal item on his/her personal website, the university will not allow this because it is part of the university domain.
I think universities ignore this because it seems to be `less criminal`, but why? as it is still illegal. So much the worse, it is even common in top universities where considering legal issues in different aspects is quite serious.<issue_comment>username_1: Are you sure those "lots of professors" you're talking about are infringing copyright holder's right? Because of the way you put it, your "question" sounded to me as if you were claiming that posting your own paper on your personal website was always copyright infringement no matter what, which is not true.
For example, here's an excerpt from [Terms and conditions associated with the American Physical Society Transfer of Copyright Agreement](http://prl.aps.org/authors/transfer-of-copyright-agreement):
>
> The author(s)... ...shall have the following rights (the “Author Rights”):
>
>
> ...
>
>
> \*3. The right to use all or part of the Article, including the APS-prepared version without revision or modification, on the author(s)’ web home page or employer’s website and to make copies of all or part of the Article, including the APS-prepared version without revision or modification, for the author(s)’ and/or the employer’s use for educational or research purposes.
>
>
>
So, you can upload the final, published version of your paper published in, say, Physical Review Letters on your personal website. It's perfectly legal from any perspective.
Of course, not all journals have the exact same policy, so what kind of right you have as the author can vary greatly from publisher to publisher and maybe from journal to journal as well. For instance, unlike APS, IEEE allows authors to upload the final, published versions [only if they chose the open access option by paying a fee](http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/authors/open_access.html). (Note that this doesn't mean IEEE forbids any online distribution of your results on your own. For example, you can still post your final accepted manuscript on your personal website [without paying the fee](http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/ieeecopyrightform.pdf). IEEE Transactions on Information Theory even encourages authors to upload your manuscript to arXiv when submitting to the journal.)
I'm not familiar with other publishers' policies, but as far as I know, many mathematics journals allow authors to upload final accepted manuscripts on their personal websites.
Could you substantiate your claim by providing links to the many examples you're sure are the kind of copyright infringement you're talking about? Maybe this is peculiar to my field, but I don't remember many instances of such copyright infringement and am having very hard time believing this is prevalent.
Also, assuming there are actually many such ilegal cases, what makes you think that universities ignore this problem for the reason that it looks less criminal? I don't see why this explanation is the most plausible.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: It is legal for a copyright holder to do whatever the holder wants to do with the work. The issue at hand is just who owns the copyright. Copyright can be owned by multiple parties, and some of those parties can sign away all or part of their rights. Doing so does not limit the rights of the remaining parties. The authors of an article may sign away their rights, but they generally do not have the authority to sign away any copyright that belongs to their employer. In the US, and perhaps elsewhere, work you perform for your employer is also copyright to your employer. In fact, depending on the terms of your contract, you may have already completely transferred copyright of any work you perform as part of your employment (and academic research likely applies) to your employer. Thus, publishers may be asking you to sign away something **that is not yours**.
I am assuming that by top universities, you mean institutions like MIT. MIT encourages employees to fight total transfer of copyright by [amending the copyright transfer agreement](http://libraries.mit.edu/sites/scholarly/files/2010/10/mitamendment2008rev1.pdf). The gist of the amendment is that MIT contends that the authors' copyright to the material is nonexclusive - it also belongs to MIT. Thus it cannot be completely signed away by the authors to publishing companies. MIT will extend its privileges back to the authors regardless of what the publisher intends. Thus:
>
> The Author shall, without limitation, have the non-exclusive right to use, reproduce, distribute, create derivative works including update, perform, and display publicly, the Article in electronic, digital or print form in connection with the Author’s teaching, conference presentations, lectures, other scholarly works, and for all of Author’s
> academic and professional activities.
>
>
>
and
>
> Once the Article has been published by Publisher, the Author shall also have all the non-
> exclusive rights necessary to make, or to authorize others to make, the final published version of the Article available in digital form over the Internet, including but not limited to a website under the control of the Author or the Author’s employer or through
> any digital repository, such as MIT’s DSpace.
>
>
>
and
>
> The Author further retains all non-exclusive rights necessary to grant to the Author’s employing institution the non-exclusive right to use, reproduce, distribute, display, publicly perform, and make copies of the work in electronic, digital or in print form in connection with teaching, digital repositories, conference presentations, lectures, other
> scholarly works, and all academic and professional activities conducted at the Author’s employing institution.
>
>
>
Since these rights are *non-exclusive*, they don't prevent the publisher from providing high quality print and online versions of the article to their subscribers. They also do not prevent the authors and MIT from making the article publicly available in a noncommercial way.
While MIT has taken steps to explicitly assert its rights to do so, many institutions likely have such rights implicitly (for example, they may be stated in employee contracts) and see no need to limit or infringe upon their own rights.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Why the university officials do not take action over this copyright violation?
>
>
>
**Because they can't.** There is no way to tell whether a given electronic preprint violates the publisher's copyright-transfer agreement or not. Different publishers place different restrictions on authors' rights to redistribute their papers. Some allow posting pre-edited versions; some allow posting the official camera-ready version; some allow neither; some only require an exclusive publication license and leave copyright in the author's hands. These restrictions change over time, and may depend on whether the author paid an open access fee to the publisher. The only way to determine whether an electronic (p)reprint is posted illegally is to read the actual copyright-transfer/publication contract. But this contract is directly between the authors and the publishers; **universities have *no* record of these agreements.**
**Because they don't have to.** At least within the US, university web sites generally fall under the "safe harbor" provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which requires copyright holder to request removal of the specific items to which they claim copyright.
**Because the publishers don't care.** Scary legal language notwithstanding, academic publishers **in many fields** have **zero** interest in pursuing legal action against individual researchers for posting copies of their own papers in violation of copyright transfer agreements. (I have heard this said specifically about ACM, IEEE, SIAM, and Springer, by people with connections inside each of those organizations.)
**Because it's not in their best interest.** Both universities and the public benefit materially from the public availability of research by their faculty, students, postdocs, and other researchers. Universities have no incentive—aside from a potential legal threat that they know will never materialize—to proactively censor that research. Many universities, and more recently many *governments*, have adopted open-access policies that either encourage or require their members to amend publication agreements and make their work publicly available.
**Because researchers would revolt.** Even **if** academic publishers started sending DMCA notices to universities, and even **if** universities required their members to take down copies of their papers, **in violation of research community expectations**, the people whose research is being censored would simply take their business elsewhere. Those publishers would receive fewer papers, and those universities would receive fewer graduate school and faculty applicants.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: You are describing the US arrangment. In the UK though to be able to participate in the research excellence framework, thus in future funding for the university, all research must be made open access. Most if not all UK universities have their own open repositories where one will publish pre-prints if the journal or academic repository a piece of work was published in was not open access.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/13 | 1,488 | 6,338 | <issue_start>username_0: When writting an article with outputs (by outputs I mean a big dataset created), how do you share them?
Do you ask the readers to contact the main author? Should I pput them in a university website?<issue_comment>username_1: Take a look at <http://thedata.org/>, which provides free, permanent hosting of data allowing you to cite a specific iteration of a dataset in your printed work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Depends. Some journals have online depositories for supplemental material such as data tables and multimedia files that are not appropriate or impossible to be included in main articles. For example, here's an excerpt from [the official website of Physical Review Letters](http://prl.aps.org/info/polprocl.html):
>
> Supplementary material associated with an article (e.g., data tables, color-image files, multimedia files) may be submitted electronically for joint review. If the article is published this material will be deposited as Supplemental Material. Information about Supplemental Material is available via the Supplemental Material links on the Information for Authors subpage at <http://prl.aps.org/author-information/>, in the Authors, General Information section.
>
>
>
I've also seen many mathematics papers that cite authors' websites for computational results, and actually I've written one where I gave a link to my co-author's website for mathematical objects found by a computer search. Different journals may have different policies about how you should present and maintain such material. So you should check that on your own before submitting your work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the answers outlined previously, I would like to add that some authors/researchers just share the datasets freely on their own websites or on their university's data repository. For example, see [this](http://snap.stanford.edu/data/) (an example of multiple datasets shared on the author's website and referred to in subsequent papers) and [this](http://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/30908?mode=full) (example of dataset shared on the university e-commons repository).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In my field (chemistry/spectroscopy), it is so far rather uncommon to make the data directly available, so the strategy is **email the author**.
Here are my 2ct about the reasons for storing the data in private repositories:
* I'm working in a research institute, not in a university. Public release of data here has to be decided the same way as licensing for produced software is decided. However, here this is rather easy from a legal point of view, as basically the institute owns the data. At universities this is often far more difficult as the ownership can be shared between several persons and institutions, e.g. if not all people involved in producing the data set had a working contract that includes this data collection (e.g. PhD students, guests).
The data set is often the primary product of a researcher. Collecting samples and conducting experiments can take lots of effort (I'm talking of years).
* Sometimes there is sensitive (e.g. patient) data. In that case, better be on the safe side. What if later on a flaw in data anonymization is found in a publicly accessible data set?
* It is often difficult to share the data anyways (that is: in the way that would be most valuable for us spectroscopists) because it can be extremely hard to combine data sets acquired with different instruments.
* These points together usually mean that if someone is using someone else's data for new original research it is usually done in the form of a collaboration.
* People who do offer data for sharing often like to keep at least approximately track of how many people get their data because this number is useful for all kinds of end of the year / end of the project reports and number of people who asked about the data is a much more convincing number than download counts.
* All in all, we have a central server here, where raw data and source and possibly intermediate results are stored together with the final version of the publications.
The size of such a package can easily be of a size that would mean that a few downloads would equal the monthly internet traffic of the whole institute. This is outside the supplementary material policies of the journals in which I have published so far. Some friends in another institute in the neighbourhood share their data with collaboration partners by mailing hard disks...
* Last but not least: there's also a question of reliability - will, say, github still be there in 20 years? Will your university web page still be there in 5 years? (OK, the corresponding author's email may vanish just as fast..., but it is usually not that difficult to track down the new email or the email of another of the co-authors).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: **It depends on your field. If you're not aware of major repositories, ask a librarian who specializes in your field.**
Most fields in most countries are getting field specific repositories. For example, I'm currently working on a project building a repository for Australian Archaeological Data ([as well as collecting it](http://www.fedarch.org/wordpress/mission/)).
We're forking our repository from [tDAR](http://www.tdar.org/) in the United States, and are cooperating with the [Archaeology Data Service](http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/) in the UK. The list just goes on ([Open Context](http://opencontext.org/), [OCHRE](http://ochre.uchicago.edu/), etc...).
When trying to investigate data publishing, always try to check for other countries as well. There are *many* data publishing projects getting off the ground. It may be worthwhile engaging a research librarian for this task.
Never try to reinvent the wheel, here. You are not experiencing a common problem, and local university library archival storage is... sometimes very much a mixed bag.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I like <https://zenodo.org/> for the following reasons:
* It is free (as in beer)
* You can publish datasets up to 50GB
* Your Dataset gets a DOI
* The interface is clean
I've recently published a dataset there ([paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.08380), [dataset](https://zenodo.org/record/259444))
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/14 | 790 | 3,524 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm used to a system in which all important exams or pieces of coursework are marked anonymously. (That is, papers are identified by candidate number, not by name, and the examiner does not know which number corresponds to which student, at least until the marks have been submitted.) This has obvious advantages in terms of reducing bias by making sure marks are awarded based only on the quality of the work and not influenced by the name of the student.
I was surprised when I joined my current department to find that no attempt is made to keep work anonymous -- students hand in their final exams with their names at the top and their lecturer marks them.
Are there any advantages to knowing which student's paper you are marking?
In a system where students' names are on their papers, what do people do to prevent bias while marking?<issue_comment>username_1: I've worked both ways and I'm unsure which way is best. There are clearly benefits to each way.
You already understand the benefits of 'blind' marking - you are more likely to be unbiased. However, by knowing the student behind the writing there are some benefits (along with the danger of bias).
One benefit is that you can authenticate more easily. That is, if you keep reading papers from one student and you see a sudden jump in quality (up or down) it can alert you to the possibility the work is not theirs (hired writers, etc.). Another benefit is that you can watch the development of each student over time. This is a little more difficult if you do not know while you are marking. Of course, you can go back over the papers after you submit the grades but that requires double reading (and not many want to do that for each student). There is the added benefit of seeing something which jumps out, like a special quote or comment you made in class. You can see who is getting it and who is not while you are marking. This last point is less of an issue because for stand-out cases you are more likely to read twice and it would be less work since it's a one-off event.
For exams, there is less of a benefit to the authenticity point above (since they were in the exam room) but it does still allow you to keep an eye on students. There is the obvious administrative benefit of not having to anonymize the exams.
As for preventing bias when papers are not anonymous, I consider each mark quite carefully and ask myself if I am being biased. When I look over all the marks and I see that I passed students I cannot stand and that I failed students I really like, then I feel fairly confident that I am keeping my bias in check.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Maybe a bit different than the types of exams that you are thinking about, but notice that for some classes like for instance art classes where the exam is based on something they have worked on for a longer time in class, or acting, it is actually impossible to have an anonymous exam (unless of course if only external persons are used to give marks).
From my experience, I have always had anonymous markings on the paper bases exams I have taken, but for my practical acting exams the marks were set by both the teacher and one external person, so I guess that gave the best of both worlds.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: When marking exams, I mark question by question, focusing on the requirements of the question. By doing this, while marking, don't take heed of whose exam I am marking - just the question.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/14 | 728 | 2,967 | <issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a research article and later realized that it has a slight error. The paper is now under review. I have proposed a few theorems; one theorem contains a slight error that can easily be removed. The methodology is correct. Would this cause the rejection of my paper?<issue_comment>username_1: In order to answer this question, we need to define some magnitudes of errors.
A *small* error does not affect the conclusions and if the manuscript was accepted as is could be fixed in the proof stage before the manuscript goes to press.
A *minor* error does not affect the conclusions but requires too many changes to be made that it could not be fixed in the proof stage.
A *substantial* error affects the conclusions and would require the manuscript to be re-reviewed.
If you have found a substantial error, you need to contact the editor and request the manuscript be pulled from the review process. You do not want to waste the time of the editor and reviewers. A small error can either be ignored or reported to the editor if you think that the correction will help save the reviewers time. Minor errors are the real problem. There is no easy way to tell the editor/reviewer what is wrong, but an unclear manuscript is likely to get negative reviews. I would suggest contacting the editor and explaining and apologizing for the problem.
The real question should be how did you find the error? What are you doing looking at a manuscript after it has been submitted?
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> What if you have submitted a[n]... article ... that has a slight error?
>
>
>
You're answering your own question. If it's slight, then it's slight, and should not matter much.
Still, to be more practical: If
* The error, despite its slightness, means a significant claim is invalid, and
* The "distance" from the submitted version to the corrected version is small (e.g. replace a sentence, change a couple of numbers etc.), and
* You've just now submitted the paper (i.e. not weeks ago)
then I might describe a correction, in at most one paragraph of text (hopefully much less), and would write the PC chair to ask whether that can be passed on to the reviewers.
In all other cases I'd just wait it out and see.
>
> Would it cause the rejection of my paper?
>
>
>
If the error is indeed slight, then this is very unlikely. But if your theorem says ["P = NP"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP_problem) and you typed "=" instead of "!=", then maybe it will be rejected :-)
Seriously, though, the only cases I think this could have any weight is:
* Clueless reviewer who loses track of the flow of the paper because of the slight mistake, and thinks you've derailed yourself with it
* The slight mistake being accompanied by several other mistakes, slight or otherwise, so the submission is perceived as having numerous mistakes (regardless of their severity).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/14 | 763 | 3,130 | <issue_start>username_0: I have an offer from one university and still awaiting results from others.
How to approach other universities and ask them about my application status so that I receive my selection / rejection before the deadline of accepting the offer? Is it rude to inform the universities that I have an offer from another university and will be accepting if the results are not announced before the deadline?
All the universities are in the same region.<issue_comment>username_1: In order to answer this question, we need to define some magnitudes of errors.
A *small* error does not affect the conclusions and if the manuscript was accepted as is could be fixed in the proof stage before the manuscript goes to press.
A *minor* error does not affect the conclusions but requires too many changes to be made that it could not be fixed in the proof stage.
A *substantial* error affects the conclusions and would require the manuscript to be re-reviewed.
If you have found a substantial error, you need to contact the editor and request the manuscript be pulled from the review process. You do not want to waste the time of the editor and reviewers. A small error can either be ignored or reported to the editor if you think that the correction will help save the reviewers time. Minor errors are the real problem. There is no easy way to tell the editor/reviewer what is wrong, but an unclear manuscript is likely to get negative reviews. I would suggest contacting the editor and explaining and apologizing for the problem.
The real question should be how did you find the error? What are you doing looking at a manuscript after it has been submitted?
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> What if you have submitted a[n]... article ... that has a slight error?
>
>
>
You're answering your own question. If it's slight, then it's slight, and should not matter much.
Still, to be more practical: If
* The error, despite its slightness, means a significant claim is invalid, and
* The "distance" from the submitted version to the corrected version is small (e.g. replace a sentence, change a couple of numbers etc.), and
* You've just now submitted the paper (i.e. not weeks ago)
then I might describe a correction, in at most one paragraph of text (hopefully much less), and would write the PC chair to ask whether that can be passed on to the reviewers.
In all other cases I'd just wait it out and see.
>
> Would it cause the rejection of my paper?
>
>
>
If the error is indeed slight, then this is very unlikely. But if your theorem says ["P = NP"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP_problem) and you typed "=" instead of "!=", then maybe it will be rejected :-)
Seriously, though, the only cases I think this could have any weight is:
* Clueless reviewer who loses track of the flow of the paper because of the slight mistake, and thinks you've derailed yourself with it
* The slight mistake being accompanied by several other mistakes, slight or otherwise, so the submission is perceived as having numerous mistakes (regardless of their severity).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/15 | 474 | 1,943 | <issue_start>username_0: I was wondering, in the field of Computer Science, if there is a convention for acknowledging that author ordering for an academic paper is by alphabetical order, not contribution.
I know that in CS, alphabetical ordering, isn't all that common, however due to a lack of internal consensus, alphabetical ordering would be preferred in my situation.
Even in fields outside of CS, is there a convention for perhaps indicating in a footnote that the author list is alphabetical and NOT by contribution?
EDIT: To elaborate a bit more, after examining the question posted [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2467/what-does-first-authorship-really-mean), our field would likely be considered 'computer systems' (rather than theoretical computer science) where it is stated that the first author is usually the team lead. However in our situation, as I said, we are having internal disagreement over which person would be considered 'leader', and I was wondering what the best way to indicate equal contribution, or perhaps use alphabetical ordering to avoid the issue all together. We weren't really expecting to submit our work for publication (we're undergraduates), so this all has been rather unexpected.<issue_comment>username_1: In theoretical CS, alphabetical order **is** the norm - see the relevant wikipedia [entry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_authorship#Authorship_in_mathematics_and_theoretical_computer_science).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends on the subfield. [<NAME> has a nice paper working this out](http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~appel/papers/science.pdf) for different conferences. ([Hat tip <NAME> on MO](https://mathoverflow.net/questions/19987/math-paper-authors-order).)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: We ended up making a note with the author's list that names were in alphabetical order an not indicative of contribution.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/15 | 1,650 | 6,894 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a post doc (in theoretical computer science) and the only teaching experience I had so far was to teach some tutorial classes for undergraduate courses and giving some "guest lectures" in some graduate classes. It seems that most positions for assistant professor require you to show some teaching experience, i.e. at least co-teaching some courses. The problem is, my current department is quite inflexible giving such assignments to postdocs.
On the positive side, I got some pretty good student evaluations for the tutorials I've been teaching, whether that is considered helpful without teaching a "real" course, is of course a different matter.
Overall, my research record (several tier-1 publications) beats my teaching record (by far).
Will my lack of teaching experience be a showstopper when applying for follow up positions?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> It seems that most positions for assistant professor require you to
> show some teaching experience, i.e. at least co-teaching some courses.
>
>
>
Really ? We all ask for teaching statements, but it's rare to see committees in **research-oriented** departments pay more than lip service to this at application review time. For sure, if a candidate can't deliver a good lecture, it's unlikely that their job talk will be excellent. But that's only an indirect signal.
Now if you're talking about departments with a heaving teaching focus, then I'm sure they expect more in the way of provable teaching skills, and may even ask you to give a class lecture as part of the interview process.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm surprised to hear you say that "most positions for assistant professor require you to show some teaching experience, *i.e., at least co-teaching some courses.*" If you are applying to positions in the U.S. where research will be your primary duty, your prior tutorial and guest lecture experience should be sufficient to get you past whatever minimum you need, especially if you have evaluations to back this up. Of the five colleagues of mine who received tenure-track offers at Reasearch I universities, only one of them had co-taught a class, and the others had one semester of TA experience which was, primarily, grading.
That said, there are other ideas for getting teaching experience:
1. Creating your own course or seminar to teach in the summer or during a January term. If you pitch it as a non-credit course, it might be easier to convince your department to let you teach it.
2. Look for adjunct work at a local community college. You'll probably be limited to introductory courses, but this gets you experience. You may need the buy-in from your faculty boss at your current school.
3. Talking to individual professors about helping with their course -- I find it hard to believe that everyone has all the help they might like already, and you may have more luck getting your foot into a classroom without trying to be officially assigned to it.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Chris and username_1 answer for research-intensive institutions. At a primarily undergraduate institution, teaching experience is more important, **but** search committees (being composed of people who went through the process before) know that most PhDs and post-docs have very little teaching experience, and most of it is the type that you have listed. What most committees are probably looking for is any evidence of teaching potential. Teaching experience does not always mean good teaching. If you do not have a lot of experience, then you should ask your references to address *teaching potential* in your letters (and you should have difference letters for primarily undergrad institutions than for research institutions).
>
> Does more teaching experience help you get a phone interview?
>
>
>
**Probably.** It's one of the few things that can make you stand out on paper.
>
> Does more teaching experience help you get an onsite interview?
>
>
>
**No.** Once you make it to the phone interview, it's all about you, your personality, and how you might fit with the department. In addition to teaching experience/potential, you need to show that you are interested and capable of starting a research program with undergraduates, and that you have a project reasonable to the resources of the institution. If your research requires use of one of only a half-dozen specialized instruments in the world, you will likely not get called back.
>
> Does more teaching experience increase your chances of getting the job once you do the onsite interview?
>
>
>
**No.** The onsite interview likely will include a sample lecture. If you are interviewing at a primarily undergraduate institution, and you mess up the sample lecture, you're done. The sample lecture is how your *teaching potential* is measured. I've seen people with very little experience do a fantastic job (i.e. engage the class, work examples, answer questions, etc.), and I've seen people with 5+ years of experience stare at their PowerPoint slides, read them word for word, and never look at the class.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm not sure if it would exactly be a major hindrance, but at every school I interviewed at this past season, all of them asked me about what I've taught before and what kind of courses I would teach and develop at the school if they hired me. I believe that answers to these questions are things that you can work on even if you don't have teaching experience. It's not exactly difficult to say, "I want to teach *topic 1* and *topic 2*" for courses if that's what your research was in.
That said, actually teaching a course is quite different from doing guest lectures and teaching assistantships. One professor advised me, "You might want to teach at least one course to make sure that you can, at least, tolerate teaching before you commit to academia."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: You don't have "a lot" of teaching experience, but what little you have is of "good quality," as evidenced by your good reviews.
Teaching is a "secondary" function at most universities, and will be judged on a "pass-fail" basis. Here, you have clearly "passed." You don't need to worry about "acing" teaching.
The thing that will get you considered for most positions is your research. If you had "no" teaching experience, that might be a handicap, but "limited" teaching experience probably is not. For your purposes, "tutorials" are as good as "real courses."
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I have no experience in theoretical computer science. But in mathematics: it seems to me a postdoc position that has no real teaching responsibilities is a disservice to the candidate. For reasons such as those mentioned. They prepare that guy only for a research position with no teaching.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/15 | 707 | 2,836 | <issue_start>username_0: I have to write a research proposal for some (post doctoral) fellowship (for Mathematics/Mathematical Physics). The authority wants me to submit a short research proposal (preferably in two pages which includes bibliography). Can someone suggest what one should consider while writing such a proposal with a length restriction? I believe, I just have to highlight the main points of the the research and give a bibliography with it, but I may be wrong. The idea in my mind contains several steps. Should I give a time frame as well to finish each one? Please help.
Reconsidering once again, can someone tell me how to write good research proposals in areas like pure mathematics (I mean, like Non-commutative geometry, K-Homology etc. where, unlike some other subjects, number of papers, an average researcher can produce at the time of graduation, is less).<issue_comment>username_1: I'm sure this depends wildly from area to area, and while I work in the theoretical side of CS, I claim no expertise on math research proposals. Having said that, there are some general guidelines.
Since you're applying for a fellowship, it's competitive. So you have to make a few points in your proposal:
* [**WHY**] that the problem you're studying is interesting and worthwhile
* [**HOW**] that your line of attack (briefly sketched) is plausible
* [**WHO**] and that you have the right skills to execute this plan
and all of this in 2 pages !
Unless specifically asked for, I'd be surprised to see a timeline, especially with open-ended research. However, if the postdoc is for a fixed time, then the work being proposed should expect to produce some tangible results in that time frame if the plan works.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this might be useful as complementary to the questions mentioned by username_1. I heard for the first time about **Heilmeier Catechism** in one of the grant writing workshops. Since then I always think to Heilmeier questions while writing a proposal or paper.
I copy Heilmeier questions from [DARPA website](https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/heilmeier-catechism), however another version is available from [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_H._Heilmeier).
1. What are you trying to do? Articulate your objectives using absolutely no jargon. What is the problem? Why is it hard?
2. How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?
3. What's new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?
4. Who cares?
5. If you're successful, what difference will it make? What impact will success have? How will it be measured?
6. What are the risks and the payoffs?
7. How much will it cost?
8. How long will it take?
9. What are the midterm and final "exams" to check for success? How will progress be measured?
Upvotes: 5 |
2013/05/15 | 734 | 2,906 | <issue_start>username_0: I have the following situation.
I have published a paper and in order to get and analyse the results for my research I created some software. I want to make my software open-source, so that anyone can do research with it and change/improve it for their purposes.
But I would like people to cite my paper if they are going to publish anything using my software. So if someone is just using it for fun, I do not care, but if someone modified it and used his modified version to collect/analyse the results, which he publishes in any paper, I want him to cite the paper I have wrote.
Is there an appropriate software license or other means for this purpose?<issue_comment>username_1: You could try adapting one of the existing open source licences, with help from your university's Legal IP team. **But** a software licence is the wrong tool for the job.
One way to do it, is to write a **methodology** paper. That's the paper that then gets cited by anyone using your code, or an adapted version of your code, to produce material for subsequent papers.
As the paper you published was just about the results you got from the software, I've got some bad news and some good news for you.
The bad news is that you've got to write another paper.
The good news is that this new paper will use work that you've already done. It will be a methodology paper where you describe the software in detail, providing the source as supplementary information. And that's what will get cited, by those who use your software.
You can also include something such as a bibtex file in with the distribution of your software, to make citation easier: **the more you can do to reduce hurdles to citation, the more chance you've got of getting those citations**. Once you've got the above paper written, the bibtex file should describe that paper. And before then, you can do [what the R-project does](http://cran.r-project.org/doc/FAQ/R-FAQ.html#Citing-R):
>
> To cite R in publications, use
>
>
>
```
@Manual{,
title = {R: A Language and Environment for Statistical
Computing},
author = {{R Core Team}},
organization = {R Foundation for Statistical Computing},
address = {Vienna, Austria},
year = 2013,
url = {http://www.R-project.org}
}
```
>
> Citation strings (or BibTeX entries) for R and R packages can also be obtained by citation().
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You cannot guarantee that people will cite the paper. All you can do is make it easier for them.
A rather obvious idea: why not write on the software's web page something like
>
> If you use or adapt this software in your research could you please cite it as follows: **[details of citation, such as bibtex]**.
>
>
>
Include this message also in the README file, the user manual and so forth.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/15 | 692 | 3,035 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a manuscript that is under review in a major journal which is a main result out of a few recent years of my research. When applying for faculty positions, I would like to send the draft as a part of my writing sample. But since the material is not yet published, I am not sure if it is a good idea.
What are the foreseeable disadvantages of sending an article in review to the faculty search committee?
My area is neuroscience / biomedical engineering.
**Update**: The paper got into a high-profile journal, and I got a job at a different place which did not require a writing sample.<issue_comment>username_1: First, From a legal point of view I do not think you will have any problems sending out a pre-review version of your manuscript since your have the intellectual rights to your own work. Usually most publishers' copyrights start when they have processed the material in some way but even then, if you are not using the material for any commercial purpose or for being reproduced publically, I cannot see any problem.
Then, I cannot really see any problems sending a pre-reveiw manuscript to a search committee unless it is of poor quality. Sending your work allows people to see what you are doing and a manuscript (in very good shape) will allow people to see your latest work in detail. Naturally a manuscript will not carry as much merit as a published paper since it has not been through peer review. But, if it is interesting, well written and in impeccable order you will be showing your skills in some way.
So it could provide a slight positive in a search situation if good but be very negative if bad and your judgement is what will be at stake.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Although your question is specifically for faculty job applications, I would like to generalize and add to Peter's answer.
For doctoral program admissions, I often sent out an article under review whenever asked for a writing sample. Not all programs ask for this ; for some its optional and for some its not but I sent them anyway. Usually, when I was interviewed for the position after having made it through some of the initial cut-offs, my writing sample was alluded to and often, questions were centered around it.
Therefore, I would like to say that sending it in anyway will not detract from your application but might even add to it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: To add to the existing answers, I'd note that in some fields, the review process can be very long. If you stick only to papers that have been published, you'll be giving the committee a picture of your research that may be years out of date. Committees will understand this; sometimes they *explicitly* ask for preprints.
If you're confident in the quality of the article, and have a reasonable expectation of eventually getting it published, send it along. Conversely, if you don't feel the article represents your best work, don't send it, even if it has been published already!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/15 | 1,754 | 6,146 | <issue_start>username_0: Right now I'm using Web of Knowledge, ScienceDirect, etc. to find papers to read and get some metadata. My university has a subscription, so this is nice. As far as I know these databases simply have a selection of journals, download all of the articles from those journals, and display them for me, updating every time the journal publishes. My question is: what percentage of journals are actually represented here? Some people say there are between 10,000,000 and 100,000,000 published academic documents in the sciences. Web of Science has about 50,000,000, and it's not clear how many ScienceDirect has.
A good comparison would be: if you take everything that Elsevier, Wiley, Springer, and Nature have, combined, and subtract everything that Web of Knowledge has, how many things are left?
Another way to phrase it: Of the major publishers (like the ones I listed above), how many are represented in these databases?<issue_comment>username_1: Not very. For example, Elsevier is a large publisher, but only still publishes a fraction of the total number of journals and articles in the world. By my count, they publish at least [2,797](http://www.elsevier.com/journals/title/a) journals. They also market [Scopus](http://www.elsevier.com/electronic-products/scopus) as
>
> the world's largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed
> literature and quality web sources
>
>
>
By my count again, and you may need a subscription to access this information, there are [3230](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=BrowseListURL&_type=title&_title=A&md5=fcab2d7552e90ca57f4fa29a391c7e48&applyBrowseFilters=Apply) journals indexed by Scopus. So unless Elsevier publishes 87% of all the journals in the world, Scopus is missing some. In fact we know they are since [Pubmed](http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/num_titles.html) indexes 5,064 journals.
That said, most "reputable" publishers spend the money and/or produce quality products that they get included in the major indices.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The precise extent of scholarly publishing is unknown, difficult to estimate, and the subject of some debate. That said, there is lots of evidence that [Web of Knowledge](http://wokinfo.com/) and [ScienceDirect](http://www.sciencedirect.com/) are likely only the tip of the iceberg.
That is sort of the takeaway from an article I found in from [Library Journal](http://lj.libraryjournal.com/) on [Online Databases-Online Scholarly Journals: How Many?](http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2004/02/technology/online-databases-online-scholarly-journals-how-many/) (Google WebCache because the LJ copy seems gone) by <NAME> and published in February 2004.
Apparently, one of the best sources online is [Ulrichsweb](https://ulrichsweb.serialssolutions.com/) which is a serials tracking website that is part of [ProQuest](http://proquest.com/). I just did a search for "Academic / Scholarly" and "Journal" and came up with more than 107,000 different results.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: An answer for you depends on *your* purposes and standards.
If you're hoping to rule out the possibility that any published prior art is relevant to a patent claim, no database will be anywhere near the degree of completeness that you would prefer.
On the other hand, every database is complete for some purpose. For example, my understanding is that Web of Knowledge has at least a mere mention (a journal title, volume number, and page number) for every item that has been cited in the core literature since the end of the nineteenth century.
That presumes a definition of core literature that is decided by Thomson Reuters editors in the form of the product's "master journal list" on the basis of Bradford's law. Those seeking an introduction to Bradford's law could start with Sturgeon's law, which apologized for the low quality of much science fiction by observing that "90% of everything is crap." Bradford's law is the more specific, better studied converse in regard to scientific journals, that if we can examine a small but highly valuable fraction of them all, then for many purposes we can ignore the rest.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Previous research has shown strong evidence that there is a **language bias** in academic databases in the social sciences and humanities[1]. However, evidence for the sciences is mixed: Some cannot find an US bias using the Science Citation Index (SCI)[2], others actually identify also a strong language bias in the SCI[3].
Furthermore, you have to consider differences in **publication cultures** between disciplines: The humanities and social sciences still approve *monographs* and *edited books* as publications which are seldom listed in theses databases.[4]
**References:**
[1] <NAME>./<NAME>. (1999): Own-language preference: A new measure of “relative language self-citation”, in: Scientometrics, 46 (2), 337-348.
<NAME>. (1999): The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences, in: Scientometrics (1999), 44 (2), 193-215.
<NAME>./<NAME>. (2011): Coverage and overlap of the new social sciences and humanities journal lists, in: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (2), 284–294
<NAME>. (1998): The ‘language preference’ in sociology: Measures of ‘language self-citation’, ‘relative own-language preference indicator’, and ‘mutual use of languages’, in: Scientometrics, 41 (1-2), 243-254.
[2] <NAME> al. (2001): Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequencesfor international comparisons of national research performance, in: Scientometrics, 51 (1), 335-346.
[3] <NAME>. (1999): Is the science citation index US-biased? in: Scientometrics, 46 (3), 549-562.
<NAME>. (2004): The scientific impact of nations, in: Nature, 430, 311-316.
[4] <NAME>. (2006): Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A Review, in: Scientometrics, 66 (1), 81-100.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/16 | 783 | 2,696 | <issue_start>username_0: [Mathematics Genealogy project](http://www.genealogy.ams.org/) has existed for many years. It currently has 170,235 records as of 15 May, 2013. I understand there are many computer scientists in that database since computer science is generally considered a branch of mathematics.
I have found several other similar efforts. For example, the [Academic genealogy of theoretical physicists](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_genealogy_of_theoretical_physicists) Wiki page consists of about 100 theoretical physicists. I cannot find Physics Genealogy project in general. A [Chemical Genealogy Database](http://www.scs.illinois.edu/~mainzv/Web_Genealogy/) does not appear to have built a very large database.
My questions are:
* Are there genealogy project for other disciplines?
* Is there a general academic genealogy project somewhere? If yes, where? If not, are there efforts to construct it?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe [Academic Tree](http://academictree.org/) qualifies as a general academic genealogy project. It includes the fields of:
>
> Neuroscience, Experimental Psychology, Linguisitcs, Primatology, History,
> Philosophy, Music, Law, Theology, Economics, Advertising, Ingestive Behavior,
> Physics, Chemistry, Oceanography, Drosophila Genetics,
> Fission, Yeast Genetics, Mycology and Fungal Genetics, Evolutionary
> Biology, Marine Ecology, Terrestrial Ecology, Developmental Biology, Cell
> Biology, Telomere and Telomerase, Infectious Disease, Neuropathology,
> Computational Biology, Science and Techology Studies, Biomechanics
>
>
>
I think the [neurotree](http://neurotree.org/neurotree/) subtree is the largest of the areas covered with 40,000 people. It allows me to trace my academic linage back to <NAME> (thanks to the philosophy tree) in a mere 88 steps.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There used to be a computer science offshoot of the mathematics project, but it's disappeared! I was on both, but only put my PhD students on the CS one. It was a pain. There may have been issues e.g. about multiple supervisor, disputed supervision, policing?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Wikidata collects [doctoral advisor relationships](https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P184) between reseachers (among many other kinds of relationships). By now there are 900 such relationships1 but I would not be suprised if people start to import data from other academic genealogy projects.
---
1[Try SPARQL query](https://query.wikidata.org/) `SELECT (COUNT(*) AS ?c) { ?s p:P184 ?o }` to get current numbers. Anyone more familiar with SPARQL can surely query a distribution among academic disciplines.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/05/16 | 862 | 3,705 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently writing my master thesis and would like an opinion on whether or not to use a cover illustration on the thesis.
I've noticed many students around me do not take the time to make the cover page attractive (e.g. a simple title is all).
What is the "standard" convention regarding the cover page of a master thesis?
Note that I have no restrictions from my university.<issue_comment>username_1: It's your thesis, and if your committee approves it with beautiful cover art, then you're all set.
For professional theses, the standard is a plain cover with pertinent details about the thesis. Departments or universities generally have a template document or provide specific guidance, but if that isn't true for your school, then I wouldn't worry about it.
Bottom line: I would discuss it with your advisor, and other committee members. If you want it to be a surprise to them (not advisable), then by all means give it a shot.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The primary reason for not having a "pretty cover" is simple: practicality.
Keep in mind that many schools will have "official" copies of the thesis bound; for archival purposes, and to keep production costs down, the covers don't typically have illustrations, but are usually monochromatic standard bindings. The cover art would therefore not be obvious to anybody looking at the thesis—and the low traffic for theses means it's usually not worth the effort to produce it.
However, as Chris points out, if your school *doesn't* have a policy, you can do what you'd like. On the other hand, I'd focus on the quality of the material presented in the thesis before worrying about the cover art!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'd like to provide a counter to the "content is what matters" advice. Of course the content is what it's all about, but I think that a great many people in academia underestimate the importance of presentation.
Look at the way people decide whether or not to read a paper. They look at the title. If that suggests that it's interesting to them, they read the abstract. If that's interesting enough they read the introduction and maybe the conclusion, and so on. That means that of the 4000 or so words in the paper, the five that make up the title are the most important. You're fully justified in spending as much time on the title as on 1000 words of the description of your method. The presentation of your paper is not just gloss, it determines the size of your audience. If your presentation is bad, your results have to be really exceptional to find even a small readership.
This translates directly to your Master's thesis. A nice cover shows that you care. What's more, the largest group of people that will come into contact with it, will only pick it up, look at it and put it back down again, without even really reading the title. Your cover illustration is the only opportunity you have of communicating with them and enticing them to read the title properly. From that, the summary, and from that the first paragraph of your introduction and so on.
Don't mistake presentation for gloss. Academia is all about communication, and communication is worrying about the details.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: For many students, there are strict guidelines that describe how a thesis can be formatted. If you're not restricted by guidelines, and if you have the time and inclination to have your thesis be a beautiful object, there's no reason not to.
Although the content matters much more than any amount of fancy layout, great presentation can make a difference. As in food, the first bite is always with the eye.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/16 | 1,098 | 4,717 | <issue_start>username_0: I'll be starting my PhD in the next fall. I already looked over the internet for advice for a beginner, even read two books on the subjects. Still, there is one point I haven't seen discussed as I wanted, it's the time and the way the student should be investing in catching up on his field and his specific topic, I'm speaking about the bibliographic part. For sure a student needs a lot of (continuous) input, but at the end he'll be solely judged on his output. From my previous research project, I'm not really confident in my way of balancing between going through articles/textbook material and trying to solve my own problematics. To be honest, it sometimes feels like a sneaky way of procrastinating: I'd tell myself that I'm still not ready to tackle my problem and that I need to make a little "detour" by existing works; and when it's done I don't feel more at ease to answer my questions. Or is it a normal aspect of research?
In my specific case, I'll be working on a quite new subject (string theory) when I only had advanced lecture of quantum field theory and general relativity; so I'm thinking about going through the canonical textbook on the subject during the summer, do most of the exercises and derivations in there (which already represents hundreds of hours invested), maybe revising some mathematical tools I need to be really familiar with. Once I'll have a general idea of the topic I'll jump to the main articles in relation to my thesis. I also know that I will be using numerical tools (Monte Carlo methods) and will need to get conformable with that. So far I only have a superficial knowledge and use of the tool.
Does it seem like a good use of my time? I already know that time and willpower are limited resources in grad school and I really don't want my desire to do well to burn me out from the beginning.<issue_comment>username_1: That you are thinking about these matters is a very good start. You need to remember that exactly what you need to know and to read up on will only be known in a genral sense. your PhD project theme will provide this general direction. What details you need to pick up in terms of numerical methods etc. will to a lrger extent develop as your research develops. So you do not need to worry about what you could possibly have use for. You probably know key areas relavant to the topic.
So, you need to lay a broad foundation and read up on the topic and supporting areas (fields). If there are key methods or equivalent you can start looking at that as well. However,I ould expect your advisor will also provide guidance in setting up direction through course work and suggesting reading. I would personally not expect a student to have a complete background by the time he or she starts.
So, as I state earlier, that you are thinking about this is very good but you should not worry too much because you will not know the details until you have the PhD project clearly defined and started woring with your future advisor. So any knowledge you can gain will be a bonus but you are not expected to finish your PhD until you have completed your PhD studies.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> To be honest, it sometimes feels like a sneaky way of procrastinating:
> I'd tell myself that I'm still not ready to tackle my problem and that
> I need to make a little "detour" by existing works; and when it's done
> I don't feel more at ease to answer my questions. Or is it a normal
> aspect of research?
>
>
>
It is probably the most common way that new grad students attempt (consciously or otherwise) to avoid doing research :)
You have to remember that prior knowledge is an ocean you're swimming in, not a cup that you have to finish drinking. There's literally no way to "read all the prior literature": there's always something more.
General reading is perfectly fine, but when you have a problem to work on, it's best to break down bibliographic research into:
* what does prior work say about your problem and what's the key open question (and this is something your advisor can help you with)
* Once you start thinking about a specific problem and are trying to apply some specific tools, is there material to help you understand those tools better ?
* When you're writing up, what **related** (not **prior**) work should you be aware of ?
At each stage, read only as much as you absolutely need to, in order to avoid going down rabbit holes. And remember, as a new Ph.D student, it's not a terrible thing if you reinvent something that someone discovered before, and only learn of this after the fact. You just don't that happening at your dissertation defense :)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/17 | 684 | 2,765 | <issue_start>username_0: What options are there, and how do they compare against each other, for digitally publishing (for example, a series of short stories)?
In addition to the issue of format management (producing whatever electronic file formats are appropriate) any information about distribution would also be welcomed.
I am a teacher in a graduate-level literature program and am looking for solutions I can pass on to my students, so this is not just for my own use.<issue_comment>username_1: The good news is that once you've got a text in one eBook format, it is relatively painless to publish it in additional formats (PDF being the notable exception, though it is generally easy to get a document into PDF format--you can do a decent job with a converter such as Calibre--see below--but translating the format properly is sometimes tricky).
At the very least, you should publish in PDF format. While not a particularly good format for reading on portable devices, it is a universal format that *can* be read on any any modern eReader, and, of course, on a PC screen.
I would also suggest formatting the book in the open [EPUB](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPUB) format, and in a Kindle format (either [.MOBI, AZW, or .KF8](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kindle_Format_8#File_formats)). I would then link to all of the formats on your web page, possibly with instructions on how to get the volume onto a particular device. You could also consider [self-publishing the volume to the Kindle store](https://kdp.amazon.com/self-publishing/signin/187-5862717-6823129), but bear in mind that there may be restrictions, and I believe you will be forced to charge for the volume. The iTunes Store is another possibility, but comes with its own restrictions and formatting / conversion guidelines.
You should definiltely download the fine E-Book manager, [Calibre](http://calibre-ebook.com/), which can convert between formats and is free.
In the end, there isn't one true standard for eBook formats yet, but it is not difficult having a few different formats on your web page.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest using iBook Author (free).
Drawbacks
---------
* The drawback is that e-books created with this software are only
viewable as PDF or on an iPad.
* As someone who has used InDesign for
page layout projects, I find the layout capabilities are limited.
* As @username_1 points out, this application is only available for **Mac running Lion** or higher.
Advantage
---------
* The advantage is that this format allows teachers to add chapter/unit review quizzes, embedding of 3D objects, image galleries,presentations, & even html.
*Feel free to contact me if you need more information about this.*
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/18 | 882 | 3,863 | <issue_start>username_0: When writing a paper, I usually face the problem of deciding whether a sentence is cite-able or not. Let's say I am writing about optimization of an algorithm. And I used Java to implement it. So, in the introduction, I would say something like "Java is a class based object oriented language..." This information is available in many java books and online tutorials. Does the ubiquity of the sentence make it un-citeable? Or do I cite that fact. I have read many prominent papers that simply use that sentence without quoting a source.
Or do we only cite numerical facts that go like "Java is x times slower/faster than c++". I once read an article that says "when writing a paper, you should cite every sentence that you happen to read some where." But this is unrealistic; and we might have almost as many citations as the number of sentences in the paper.
Is there any rule that dictates on what is quotable or not?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, there are rules on what requires citation.
Generally, publicly-known information (widely known, common knowledge, etc.) does not need to be cited. Your sentence about Java being class-based would fall under this category.
Information which is based on someone else's work (analysis, research, pictures, etc.), whether quoted or paraphrased, should always be cited. Your sentence about Java being x time slower/faster than C++ would fall under this category.
If you are unsure, cite it to be safe.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It depends of the audience at which is aimed the article.
In theory, in a scientific document you must explicitly list the basis for all your assumptions, and defend them. If the correctness of the thesis described in your article depends on fact $A$, then you either prove $A$ or give a reference to someone who proved $A$. In practice scientific reports skip some references assumed to be common (e.g. definition and properties of the logarithm): it used to be important to save printing space (not so true now with electronic proceedings), it stays important to keep the article uncluttered. Given the reasons for skipping some references, there cannot be any absolute rule about which ones to skip: the decision depends of the audience you are aiming at, and in particular of your evaluation of the knowledge in common between you and them: put references when they are necessary *to your audience* (and do not clutter your article when they are not).
For instance, your sentence about Java being class-based would be unwelcome (in addition of unnecessary) in an article aimed at researchers in computer science, because this fact is supposed to be well known (and agreed upon). But it might be welcome in an article aimed at students (in computer science or not), or researchers in other fields than computer science (e.g. biologists). On the other hand, the fact that Java is slower than C++ might evolve in time (e.g. java compilers getting better), or be argued against (different type of applications): you should always give a reference for this kind of statement if you did not argue or prove it yourself.
Hope it helps!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: These are not rules but the way I think about it:
1. if the information is basic introductory text book material, you may not need to cite it.
2. If the information can be found in advanced text books (not intro-level), cite a book that you are familiar with and that supports that statement.
3. If the informaiton is only found in research papers obviously those are what you reference.
If yu are uncertain, you simply quote a higher level: uncertain if it goes into (1.) then do (2.) etc. It is worse to miss referencing than providing a citation/reference "too much". In the worst case someone might suggest removing the refence/citation.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/18 | 1,978 | 8,582 | <issue_start>username_0: An Editor in Chief of a journal ought to be proud of their journal and consider it a good place to publish their own work, so not publishing in the journal that they edit suggests a lack of confidence in the journal. On the other hand, is publishing regularly in your own journal ethical? Can we reasonably expect the Editor in Chief's papers to be handled with the same rigour as for anybody else? Wouldn't there be implicit pressure on the handling editor to accept a paper that might be rejected had it come from an external author? It seems to me that it would be better to be seen to be fair by publishing elsewhere (or at least only publishing occasionally in one's own journal), but I was wondering what the balance of opinion was on this.<issue_comment>username_1: There are of course no laws against it but as Editor-in-Chief (EiC) myself I would never do it, or would at least think twice about doing it, particularly as first author. My reasoning behind this is that it could reflect badly on me, but particularly on the journal, and send signals that all is not necessarily well. I have to point out that in my case we are two and we have an agreement that we do not touch manuscripts from our own spheres of influence (basically departments). Nevertheless, what actually happens within a journal and how people perceive it are two different things and it is my opinion that as EiC one must safeguard the journal's reputation as objective. So if the community expresses some form of trust in the editor for publishing in their own journal, this could be perfectly fine.
So when an EiC publishes in "their" journal it is not wrong but potentially "dangerous" and can be perceived as poor judgement. They would jeopardize the journals reputation. So even if there are no legal problems, there are ethical problems. I doubt anyone would have second thoughts about the quality of a journal if the editor does not publish there: after all, if the editor has a solid reputation, associating with a bad journal would jeopardize that.
Can I see any exceptions? Well, co-authorship may be less serious but in the end even that should be avoided. I also think that if an editor publishes a single paper in a thematic issue of the journal (where someone else has suggested a theme) and this is the only paper by that editor in the journal for years, I would not think much about it. Obviously frequency of publications is also a factor.
So, in conclusion, I consider it unwise under most circumstances.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There have been only a few times in my career when I've run across an EIC who regularly published in his/her own journal, and in each case it looked like something was seriously wrong.
As a first constraint, it's absolutely unethical for editors to play any role whatsoever in evaluating their own papers. I.e., they should not suggest referees, solicit or have access to referee reports, participate in the decision making, or even discuss the decision with other editors. Furthermore, this lack of involvement should be made clear to the referees when the reports are solicited and to the public (for example, by including a paragraph in the journal's web site about how editorial submissions are handled).
Ideally, there should be strong safeguards. For example, one journal I'm associated with takes the following approach. If the editor in chief submits a paper, the journal's sponsoring organization appoints a few associate editors to evaluate the submission anonymously and make individual decisions. If any one of them recommends rejection, then the paper is rejected and the rest of the editorial board never finds out who rejected it. This avoids the danger of feeling pressure from the EIC, but it leaves open the possibility of favoritism or bias, perhaps even subconsciously.
Because it's difficult to avoid bias and impossible to avoid the appearance of bias, editors should rarely submit papers to their own journals, and EICs almost never. Aside from special cases such as issues in honor of someone, the only time I think it really looks good for an EIC to submit a paper is if the paper is amazing, far above the usual level of the journal, and it's clear that the EIC is trying to raise the journal's profile by sending a paper there that could easily have been published somewhere more prestigious. This is risky: it can come across as condescending or self-aggrandizing, it looks strange if done more than very rarely, and others may disagree on how amazing the paper is. However, if the paper is indeed great then it at least avoids controversy over whether acceptance was appropriate. The really dangerous scenario is borderline-appropriate papers, where reasonable people could disagree about acceptance and it's natural to wonder whether favoritism might have tipped the balance.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm going to chime in with a slightly dissenting answer - I think it's perfectly acceptable for an EiC to publish in their own journal, given some caveats.
I think they should be very careful in doing so, and the journal should have a mechanism for handling their submissions that doesn't involve their input in any way - one of the other answers mentions a panel of reviewers to evaluate whether or not the paper gets over the "editorial interest" hurdle, or possibly purely anonymous review. The reasons I think that being the EiC alone is not cause to not submit to your own journals are as follows:
* "Publish elsewhere" doesn't necessarily work - first, you've cut the number of journals by one, and for some specialty fields, that's a rather big deal. Additionally, the EiC of a journal is likely working in a field that is particular suited to that journal - "publish elsewhere" forces scholarship into potentially awkward fitting publications for the sake of avoiding the appearance of impropriety. I'd much rather any such risk be addressed head on.
* What about collaborators? For fields where papers often have one or two authors, perhaps this is more clear, but my field routinely has papers with a great many more authors than that. Is any study that recruits one of the finest minds in their field (presumably) then inevitably doomed not to be able to publish in the journal that might fit their work best? What about their graduate students?
* Many journals are society journals - you are effectively denying a scholarly society the easiest access to the work of one of their most prominent members (again, presumably). Yes, it could get published elsewhere. But there's no promise I *read* elsewhere.
In essence, drawing a hard line and saying "No" is counterproductive - I'd rather have a journal come out with a clear and open policy that says "This is how we handle submissions from our editors" - all of them, than to issue blanket bans.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: According to page 5 of [A Short Guide to Ethical Editing by New Editors](http://publicationethics.org/files/short%20guide%20to%20ethical%20editing%20for%20new%20editors.pdf) by the Committee on Publication Ethics,
>
> Can editors publish in their own journal?
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
> Editors should not be denied the ability to publish in their own journal, but they must not exploit their position. The journal must have a procedure for handling submissions from the editor or members of the editorial board that ensures that peer review is handled independently of the author/editor. This process should be detailed once the paper is published (see: <http://www.wame.org/wame-listserve-discussions/should-editors-publish-in-their-own-journal>)
>
>
>
That said, in my experience, people tend to look down on editors who publish in their own journals. The implication is that they published their papers in their journals because other journals wouldn't publish them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The conflict of interest between editor in chief and intelectual ( author ) in publish papers in self journals is evident. But, it is aggravated with share of the members of editorial board and editor in chief participate as authors in the same journals because it may be to establish an enormous bias in the choice of the papers with impairment of the others authors. Surely, the peer review of the papers of these authors might have be difficulties in withhold the paper.Though, this behaviour isn`t considered illegal, it is ethically abominable, and detrimental for the concept of the journal.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/18 | 1,564 | 7,022 | <issue_start>username_0: I made a little statistics about my review decisions. I found out that I reject way more papers than I accept. I honestly try to accept the reviewed papers, I read them carefully and my review are always long. But most papers I review are low quality (in my opinion). Some colleagues told me that I should be more gentle in my review, as this will affect my profile somehow (negatively of course). Is that true ?
Also: should I adapt the toughness of my review to the quality of the journal/conference I am reviewing for?<issue_comment>username_1: Many more papers are submitted than accepted at top venues/journals, so statistically speaking, you should reject more than you accept.
Harsh reviews are ultimately good for science, so long as they filter the crap and help improve papers with potential but are not there yet. If your review is able to help the PC/editors decide whether or not to accept the paper and help the authors improve their paper, then you are doing your job correctly. If you are harsh but unhelpful, then you need to change your approach.
I think your reviews can change a bit depending on the venue. If you are reviewing for a workshop, your goal would be to help choose papers that are likely to generate interesting discussion. This is especially the case if there is no associated official publication.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It is of course impossible to say if you are overly critical. But, some statistics might help. With prestigious journals the rejection rate might be 90% (very high in any case). I am Editor in Chief of a smaller journal and we have a steady 50% rejection rate. The extremely high rejection rates in some journals come from limited space, in my case we simply impose strict guidelines and the rejections come from reviewers assigned by associate editors. So the rate in our case is fairly certainly upheld by what the community sees as acceptable or not.
So if you end up finding you reject large numbers (at least around 50%) I would not say that it is out of the ordinary. I do not of course know what typical rejection rates are in the journals for which you do reviews, so the number may of course vary.
So getting to the question of how this affects you. I very much doubt that you get a negative effect by being a fair reviewer. If you do many reviewes over time and you are not considered fair, I am sure you would notice the numbers of appointments dropping. If you get re-invited by the same journals/editors, I think they appreciate your work and I would take that as a sign that you do fine.
Should you try to adapt to the journal? In general, no. You should apply your knowledge and understanding to provide a critical review of the submitted work. An editor should take your comments along with comments from one or more additional reviewers and provide a recommendation to the authors. You are not solely responsible in this process! If the journal is such that it publishes material with which you are familiar but where its audience is in a different field, you may consider handling the paper differently, but obviously not ignoring errors and misconceptions.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Some journals allow you to see the reviews provided by the other reviewers of the paper, which is often a good way of monitoring your own performance as a reviewer. If you are harsh to an unreasonable degree, I suspect that editors will stop sending you papers to review, so if they are still sending them, that is an indication of sorts that there is not a fundamental problem.
As long as you are happy that you are applying a standard that you feel is reasonable, I'd stick with it. You probably review too few papers to know whether you are being unduly harsh or that you have just been sent a series of bad papers by random chance.
When I get a rejection, I am generally fine provided that the reviewer does a good job of explaining what they (incorrectly ;o) feel the problem is and what needs to be done to the paper for them to be happy with it, in sufficient detail for me to be able to do so if it is actually possible. The problem I have with negative reviews is when they make vague criticisms that can't be addressed as there is not enough information to actually act on, or where reviewers raise additional issues on the second review to reject your paper that could have been raised on the first review. So if your reviews are detailed and constructive, they are probably good reviews.
At the end of the day, it is ultimately in the author's best interests not to publish poor work, and if it can be usefully improved, then the reviewer is doing them a favour in not accepting it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: An important thing to be aware of, is that (as far as I can judge) editors tend not to send papers on which they have a bad first impression to experienced people. It follows that junior researchers tend to receive a relatively large proportion of demands to review papers that are below average. That might explain your feeling.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: In addition to points made in other answers, and strengthening username_1's first sentence: not only the best, but even "medium-good" journals receive far more *good* submissions than they could possibly publish ... at least within the traditional "page limit" constraints, and possibly within some tacit constraint about appearing sufficiently selective. (That is, even if all the papers were quite good, a journal that publishes 10,000 pages a year will be suspect...)
Thus, the job of "editor" tends to degenerate into trying to find reasons to reject.
There simply are not enough "prestigious" journals to publish all the (good!) work done by all the good young people... who now can typeset things much faster and get them submitted. (In contrast, pre-TeX, pre-internet, getting something sufficiently presentable to send to a journal was much more of a hassle... Also, the number of researchers has grown much faster than the number of good journals, at least in my field, mathematics.)
Returning to the literal question: as others have said, indeed, try to be constructive and helpful, rather than merely a gatekeeper. At the same time, you cannot count on corrective feedback from editors if you are "too harsh", because they may not realize this, and in fact have incentive not to worry about that exigency, because you are making their job easier.
Also, one should note that in recent times many respectable journals explicitly declare to referees that they, the referees, are *not* responsible for *correctness* of an article. It is supposedly the author's responsibility. This is obviously strange, but can be understood when we realize that the gatekeeper function of journals, editors, and referees is at least as important as the scientific function... as disillusioning as that might be. But it does explain situations that are otherwise baffling and counter-intuitive.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/18 | 1,990 | 8,747 | <issue_start>username_0: I was on an internship with professor A at University B in China. We were working on a computer science project. During the internship I implemented professor A's idea and got some results. Three weeks ago I finished a paper draft and left University B for a new internship. Me and professor A were planning to submit the paper draft to a conference (deadline: May 20).
Until yesterday (May 17), the order of authors was: me, professor A, other students & collaborators in the lab... And professor A had no objection with that. However, last night I received an email from him. He said he wants to be the first author... His reason was for intellectual properties and patent issues. My understanding is that because I was merely an intern at University B, if the first author was me, it would cause IP troubles for him?
**I feel deceived. But, should I feel like this?** I was counting on a first-author paper because I'm planning to apply for a PhD program in the US. One paper may not mean a lot to someone who's published a lot. But for someone who hasn't published yet, it means something.
Looking on the Internet, I found something that might explain professor A's motivations:
In China specifically, corresponding authors are often underappreciated by universities and research institues. This might be the case for University B. Given professor A is relatively young, he may want first authorship for promotion.
**Summary of my questions:**
1. Should I go discuss with professor A and try to persuade him to let me be the first author?
2. If I want to apply for a PhD program in the US, would being the first author be more helpful or being the second author is as well helpful?
**Edit:**
1. My affiliation for the paper has always been University B. I didn't mention my current university or internship in any sense.
2. I emailed back to professor A yesterday, saying I think I should be the first author, because I did most of the work; because the idea was originated from him he should be the corresponding author. He replied this morning, saying he agree with what I said. He explained that because I was doing an internship in his lab and not a student of University B, putting me as the first author could cause IP and patent troubles for University B... So this problem is fixed now.<issue_comment>username_1: My answer to whether you should feel deceived is yes and no. Strictly speaking, if you have an agreement, it should stand. That is the easy part of the answer. Then comes different traditions and personalities, which makes the territory almost impossible to negotiate.
You could simply send a reply stating you disagree with the reordering. The point of having intellectual property involved is certainly true and merits co-authorship. The problem is of course the weight between your work and the original idea. If you have worked on this on your own without any help or assistance, first authorship seems clear. If you have had help through discussions etc. through the process it becomes less clear.
In the end the matter will be up to you, if you think you will gain much from taking the fight. You can ask to add something in the acknowledgement to make clear who contributed what. Another possibility, if the paper is mostly about your work, is to add yourself as corresponding author (which can be different from first).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It is possible the professor is trying to take advantage of you, but it would help to clarify things if you would expand on your answer to include the following.
It is implied that the paper is based on Professor A's idea. What this a full-blown idea, or just the kernel of something. Or, putting it differently, did he just point you in the general direction of something, or was this a relatively finished idea that just needed to be worked out in detail? Was this an idea you expanded on, or significantly improved? Did he provide significant intellectual input while the project was ongoing, or did he leave you to your own devices?
Also, you talked about implementation. Does this mean code, or something else? Did Professor A participate in the implementation in any way? If not, did he look at the implementation?
What about the paper itself? Did he participate in a substantial way in the writing of it?
If the answer is that you did most or all of the work, and did much of the working out of the idea, then it sounds like you should be first author. If he contributed substantially, it is less clear.
However, the paradigm in general is that the junior person gets the first authorship, because they need it for career reasons. Most people are willing to abide by this. I know someone whose PhD adviser put himself as first author on his (the students) papers, and the person in question regrets it now. If you go along with this, you may also regret it.
If you don't work for this person, the question is whether you have to do what he says for some reason. If you are hoping for a good reference, a first authorship on a paper might be worth more than a reference. Does he have any other hold on you? Do you need his further input on the project, or are you hoping to publish further papers with him? Also (perhaps not very important but serves to indicate tone) was the email polite or not? Personally, I think a conversation would have been more appropriate than an email in the circumstances.
For the record, I find the argument about intellectual properties and patent issues less than compelling, but it would also help if you could say more about how these things work in your university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't really understand what the motivation here for the professor is. Since you did all of the work for this paper at University B, you should *not* list your new affiliation (whether it's an internship or another school) as an "active" affiliation for this paper. It *can* be listed as a "current address," but not as an active address for this paper. In that way, the professor still gets credit for your work, with your affiliation showing as being part of his group. (I suspect that the professor's concern is that, if you are at another institution and list *that* as your address, he won't get credit for his work.)
Another issue is that if you are not going to present the paper at the conference, he may have felt it was in his interests to list himself as a first author. How appropriate this is I have to leave to the CS community to judge.
In general, however, the first author *should* be the person who has made the largest contributions to both the research and the writing of the paper. Deviations from this need to have a very good foundation.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Should I go discuss with professor A and try to persuade him to let me be the first author?
>
>
>
I think so.
At least you would like him to explain to you why he changed his mind. He had no objection with you being the first author in the first place. Then he sent you e-mail saying he wants to be the first author a few days before the submission deadline. There must be some important reason for that.
The intellectual properties and patent issues make some sense to me since you are no longer with University B. They might cause some trouble for Prof. A.
I am not convinced the corresponding authorship in your case makes a difference. First authorship does matter in China if you are also a professor at the same level, say both of you are assistant professors. He could be looked down because you made more contribution than he did. But, you are an intern. He can explain to others that you did all these under his supervision. I think he would actually earn extra credits by helping interns/students to publish papers.
I have the same suspicion as aeismall does. Your active affiliation may be an issue for Prof. A. Which institute will you represent when the paper is presented at the conference? Who will present the paper? I think these questions are his concerns.
**Edit**
After talking to some researchers knowledgeable about the corresponding authorship in China, I learned more about the issue. Some authors don't want to be the corresponding author because they are busy with other research interests. Some are just shy away because English writing is hard for them. Some are interested in the role because they would be more widely known in his area. In most cases, the first author or the one who makes the most contribution to the paper is the corresponding author. So far, no one is able to explain to me why corresponding authors are underappreciated. It seems to have little to do with your issue.
**End of edit**
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/18 | 1,328 | 5,909 | <issue_start>username_0: After reading the question [Mentor trying to be first author?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10059/mentor-trying-to-be-first-author), I got the impression that (at least in the writers' field) the "corresponding author" flag could carry an implied meaning, such as "did more work than the other authors", or "is a more senior author". Is it the case?
I am in mathematics, a field where we typically sort the authors alphabetically, and I've never given any importance to that role (apart from "this author is willing to answer a couple of extra e-mails, if needed").<issue_comment>username_1: I am sure it can be used for many meanings. I will provide the ones with which I am familiar:
First, corresponding author means it is the person to contact if you have questions about the research. The reasons for this is what varies.
* The first author(s) are not employed at a university or are students
* The first author has done much of the legwork but someone else (a senior scientist) has provided the original idea, funding etc.
* Someone is specifically responsible for a project in which the work for the publication has been made. There may be legal requirements that a specific person should handle correspondence, for example in a company
* In some fields the most important author is not first, in which case the flag can be used.
Sometimes you will see first authors stating they are corresponding author. This is mostly implied by default in fields where the first authorship means also doing most of the intellectual work.
I am sure there are additional examples which hopefully are added by additional posts.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Corresponding authorship is often used to signal the person who is the primary contributor to the work. I've seen this in fields like economics where there is a relatively strong norm of listing authors alphabetically. In these cases, the primary contributor is signaled with the *corresponding author* designation. I've seen people go so far as to list corresponding authorship on their CVs when they list their papers although I think this is far from the norm.
In fields where authorship is not simply alphabetic, I've seen the *corresponding author* designation used to flag the second author as a major contributor because, even in cases of so called "dual-first authorship," *somebody's* name has to come first.
In lots of other fields, it caries little signal value and really is just used to mark the person who is in the best position to answer questions about the work. Of course, the person marked as best able to answer question will, mostly likely, be someone who was involved in a wide variety of the research reported in the paper.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In theoretical computer science, "corresponding author" does not carry any implied meaning related to who is the primary contributor.
The coauthors are listed in alphabetical order. The corresponding author might be, for example, the coauthor who took care of the interaction with the publisher, or a coauthor with a fairly permanent mailing address.
In pre-prints, conference abstracts, etc. we do not usually mention any corresponding author. This is just a piece of information that is required by journal publishers.
There is no prestige related to it. Certainly you will not list this kind of information in your CV.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: In my field of Physics, there seems to be no implied meaning - the 3 papers that I have got published recently, I have been the first and corresponding author, primarily due to, as Jukka and Peter have mentioned, to doing most of the legwork and having the responsibility for the research.
Also, it can be seen as a logisitcs thing, where the corresponding author is the port-of-call during the proofing/editing stages by the journal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The corresponding author is the author designated to be the first point of contact by readers of the paper. In theory, authors could use any rule they like to decide which author is the corresponding author.
However, in my experience, the corresponding author is often the author who has made the largest contribution or an author who has made one of the larger contributions to the paper. The corresponding author is also often chosen as someone who is likely to have a stable contact address and is likely to remain in academia for some time to come. In that case, supervisors are sometimes corresponding authors rather than students (even where the student has done most of the work). A similar pattern can hold in the case of industry collaborations where the academic may be the corresponding author.
Importantly, in most models of ethical publishing, all authors are meant to take responsibility for the claims in the published work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In biology, the designation "corresponding author" is sometimes used to indicate the senior author(s) of a paper. A senior author is typically the professor, which may have a central role in the project but will usually not do any of the actual experimental work. Usually the senior author is listed last, but in cases of collaborations where there are multiple senior authors that contributed equally, this would sometimes be indicated by giving these authors a "corresponding author" designation.
However even within biology there is a lot of variation and this could mean different things.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: The Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, a German research funder, uses corresponding authorship as a criterion for paying publication costs with open-access publishers ([source](https://www.mpdl.mpg.de/en/?id=50:open-access-publishing&catid=17:open-access)).
In this context, the corresponding author is the one whose funder paid for the publication.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/20 | 979 | 4,068 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate working on a small project with an esteemed scientist, whom I met through a connection. I'm communicating via email due to distance. The problem is that I'm having a lot of troubles with this project, and the last time I asked him a question he just told me to re-read the information he sent me.
I want to tell him that *it doesn't make sense* (I think he made an error), but to do so without appearing arrogant or ignorant. He's intimidating and it always seems like he's two seconds away from declaring me incompetent. Yet, I am very interested in his field and this project could yield a publication.
I don't know what to do; should I just keep asking questions (if so, how do I word them in a way that shows that I'm not just being lazy), or find a way to drop the project? I don't want to close doors on future collaborations when I'm more knowledgeable.
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I want to tell him that it doesn't make sense (I think he made an error),
>
>
>
I would suggest you to write an e-mail to him to explain the error you found.
Do re-read the information he sent you earlier before you write the e-mail. Verify the error is indeed an error. Then write the e-mail in concise manner. Explain the error in details, step by step. Don't just say there is an error. Use evidence, theory to support your claim.
Of course, etiquette is important. However, this has nothing to do with arrogance or ignorance. It has everything to do with finding the truth. Every scientist I have met would like to know any error found before the research project is finished, the earlier the better.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you think your advisor made an error, then I would suggest you figure out how to *prove* he made an error. This is the first step to showing someone they've made an error without being ignorant or arrogant (the rest follows from general customs about politeness, but you absolutely must do this first bit. He supposes, presumably in good faith, that he proved something to you; the "burden of proof" that he's wrong now lies in your hands). Besides, this is a good exercise. Lots of things don't seem like they make sense until you yourself figure out how to make them make sense to you. This can be a lot of work. This act of "hacking" someone else's grand idea until it makes sense to me is how I spend most of my time. Thankfully this often leads to totally new ideas and directions that the first guy didn't see (or thought too trivial or obviously wrong to mention, yes that happens too...)
The problem is that, in very many fields, undergraduates *are* actually extremely frustrating to work with. They don't yet speak the language, or have the baseline knowledge that all of your colleagues share. But nonetheless, this person is not the ideal advisor if he lacks the patience to put up with a lot of questions -- this is *absolutely* normal behavior for an undergraduate advisee, totally to be expected and many advisors find the interactions quite rewarding!
On the other hand though, you have some hard questions to ask yourself. Basically, you say that you want to ask questions without sounding lazy, but you must be honest with yourself about whether or not you are in fact asking lazy questions. The research process (again, at least in fields I'm familiar with) is most emphatically *not* "do exactly what some famous guy told you to do." It generally involves painfully slogging through material that *no one* really understands and proving everything you think you know to yourself repeatedly, and then to others, and then occasionally having it pointed out that you made a really silly assumption, or that some obscure paper already solved everything you had set out for. Again, the point is to create new knowledge, and so you have to know your tools inside and out. In fact, if your advisor is explaining *anything at all* clearly and to your satisfaction, what he is explaining is, by definition, old knowledge.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/20 | 1,569 | 6,604 | <issue_start>username_0: I've heard that the trendiness of your area of work is one of the important factor that has am impact your chances of getting job in academia. How far is this true?
Also, how do I decide what areas are trendy and what areas are not in the field I'm interested that is mathematics?<issue_comment>username_1: Trendiness can be factor, but a much more important factor is what needs the hiring department has. If they're chock full of topologists, it doesn't matter how "trendy" your work in topology is: there's a good chance they might be looking to expand in other areas.
OTOH, if they're looking in your area, then being at the cutting edge can't hurt. The danger of course is timing: trends rise and fall quickly, and what might be trendy right now might not be so in a year or two (maybe in mathematics, trends move more slowly).
So I'd argue that trendiness, while one potential factor, is not a universal key factor at all. Every department has their own needs.
As regards your second question, usual measures of "trendiness" include the relative frequency of publication in that subarea. In CS, it's relatively easy to determine this via conference acceptances, but in math I'm not sure how you'd go about measuring this frequency. It also helps to attend big meetings and listen to where the buzz is. An advisor can also be helpful in this regard (especially if they're pre-tenure and need to keep track of trends themselves :))
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I would recommend that you work in an area of mathematics where big theorems are currently being proven. That usually means that lots of moderate theorems are also being proven.
Some ways to see what these areas are:
* Go to national conferences; for example attend the (US) Joint Math Meetings and go to the hour-long invited talks.
* Go to your department colloquium every week, if you have one.
* Browse through the tables of contents for recent issues of the *Annals of Mathematics*, and see what areas are getting lots of papers published. (This is a sign not only that these areas are "trendy", but also that they're seeing significant ongoing progress.)
* Look at colloquium schedules for top-10 institutions, and/or institutions similar to where you hope to get hired. See what kinds of topics the speakers are lecturing about, i.e., what kinds of topics the professors there want to learn about.
* Browse the Math Jobs Wiki, click through to the web pages of successful job candidates, and skim their papers.
* (The most important) If you are in grad school, and have not yet chosen an advisor, find out whose students have gotten jobs similar to what you hope to get, and/or are doing interesting work now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Regarding the third point of username_2's suggestion, here's an article [*Topical Bias in Generalist Mathematics Journals*](http://www.ams.org/notices/201011/rtx101101421p.pdf) by <NAME> in the december 2010 issue of the Notices of the American Mathematical Society.
In many branches of mathematics, the so-called "generalist" journals are perceived more prestigious and publish many of the best results. Typically they claim that they publish papers of the highest quality in all branches of mathematics. However, they don't necessarily accept papers from each field equally likely. In fact, as the linked article's figures clearly suggest, there are clear biases for/against certain branches if you count the papers of a certain topic published in generalist journals and compare the number with the total number of papers of the same kind.
Since good generalist journals are among the most prestigious publication venues in many branches of mathematics, by looking at statistics like this, you may be able to detect prejudices about branches among mathematicians, which is mentioned in the linked article. So, if your definition of "trendy" is highly correlated with this type of prejudice (which I think it is because, all else being equal, the number of publications in prestigious journals in your CV increases your chance of getting a job in academia), it can be a fairly reliable measure of trendiness.
The Annals of Mathematics username_2 mentioned is definitely among the very top generalist journals. So checking the latest issues may tell you something about what's hot in mathematics now.
The big caveat, however, is that it only publishes 50 or so articles in each year. So, if you only look up in recent issues, your statistics can't be extremely reliable. Using a record of several years defies the purpose of knowing what's trendy right now, so you're in a bit of a conundrum. Making things more complicated, each generalist journal has their own bias as well; different journals tend to publish papers of different topics more frequently.
So, it might be better to take samples from multiple generalist journals which are considered among the top journals by many. Those journals typically publish an extremely small number of papers though. For example, the Journal of the American Mathematical Society published only 32 papers in 2011 (and 35 in 2010) according to ISI Web of Knowledge. Some prestigious generalist journals publish even fewer papers. (I'm not going to talk about which journals you should use for this purpose because it's inevitably controversial and subjective.)
In any case, if you want to check what kind of topic is discussed in a given journal, you can do that quite easily by [MathSciNet](http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/index.html). The American Mathematical Society classified branches of mathematics and gave a code number to each branch. And they've been keeping track of publications in mathematics. Just search for the MSC code of your field with a specific journal in MathSciNet and see how many hits it returns. This way, you can see how trendy your field is as well as which prestigious generalist journal likes your kind of mathematics more.
This method doesn't always work equally well though, e.g., if you're interested in applied mathematics or mathematical sides of computer science, what the Annals of Mathematics loves nowadays may not be the most reliable measure that reflects what's trendy right now. Another example is when your field became fashionable relatively recently so there isn't a good catch-all MSC code yet. For instance, arithmetic combinatorics has seen a miraculous revival in recent years in mathematics. Ann. of Math. and other prestigious journals are publishing papers in this field, but there isn't a good MSC code to capture this.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/20 | 517 | 2,075 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a second-year undergraduate majoring in mathematics. In my first year of studies, I didn't do really well on my exams and therefore my results were not good, with a GPA at around 2. I didn't really put time into it, but when I started learning advanced probability, I found that I am interested in it and want to study more and am even thinking of doing research. Also I think I have found my way to study math as I didn't quite do before. In that semester, I got 2 A+. In my school, I heard that people who apply for a master's degree normally have a first-class honors degree. Is there another way to get into more advanced study of math, even with a low GPA?<issue_comment>username_1: Admissions committees (at least in the US) are generally forgiving of low grades in your first year, especially if you (and your recommendation letters) tell a compelling story about hitting your groove/finding your passion for the material in your second year. Keep your grades up, **get some undergraduate research experience**, and you'll be fine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Basically, you have to compete with people that have a "first class honors degree."
Don't worry about the fact that you started with low grades and they (mostly) didn't. What you need to show is the fact that you are just as capable as them of making high math grades going forward.
Your two A-pluses are a good start. This may be a case of "he just found himself in his sophomore yea.r" That will at least get people to "sit up and take notice" (me, for one). The question people will ask, is something like, "is this a fluke, or can he keep it up over a whole program of study in math?
What you need is "several" more courses with As over the rest of your undergraduate program. You might take an extra course or two so that you get more As to replace your bad freshman grades. If you get to the point where people are thinking, he made "mostly As in his last ten math courses," it will do a lot to dispel concerns about your early grades.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/20 | 719 | 2,937 | <issue_start>username_0: I sometimes read student assignments where the grammar and writing style is poor. Paragraphs don't really flow. Sentences go on for ever. The ordering of words is awkward. Instead of concisely introducing the subject of the sentence, it goes on forever.
I'd like to be able to recommend resources to such students. Ideally, such a resources would be available online so I could just give them a link or two to some writing style and grammar materials with exercises.
**What is a good resource (preferably online) for teaching English speaking university students how to improve their writing style?**<issue_comment>username_1: I know that this can be the source of great frustration for teachers, especially when they do not teach writing. However, writing is one of those things, like other communication skills, that I think we all need to teach (at least a little bit) if for no other reason that our students will fail if they cannot compose a well-reasoned essay, even if they understand the material from our subject quite well.
There are plenty of universities which provide very good source material for this. [Here is one from the US](http://writingcenter.unc.edu/faculty-resources/tips-on-teaching-writing/). [Here is one from the UK](http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/index.htm). I have used materials from both (and many others) but I do not find that I can simply point the students to these sites and expect everything to work out.
As educators, sometimes we need to teach things which are more fundamental in nature. Unless your school has a 'writing center' so you can direct students there for help (my school does not). I find I need to spend 1-2 hours per semester to cover core writing issues.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As a teacher, I teach 'science literacy' to all year levels as part of my overall curriculum. Alongside this, I have the students continually practising these skills, as well as peer reviewing their work.
It takes time, but the overall benefits make the effort worthwhile.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I've progressed in my writing ability as I've progressed in my reading commitment. Have you tried assigning papers to read, followed by a short essay describing what they read?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: A selection of the best online writing sources from different universities is available [here](http://www144.griffith.edu.au/en/improve-your-english/improve-your-writing). In addition to writing, resources are available for [assignments](http://www144.griffith.edu.au/en/improve-your-english/assignment-resources) and [grammar](http://www144.griffith.edu.au/en/improve-your-english/improve-your-grammar).
Moreover, library of some universities have books (hard copy or ebooks) for these purposes which are very useful. Personally, I liked *Writing academic English by <NAME>, <NAME>* as a start point.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/20 | 1,400 | 6,356 | <issue_start>username_0: One subject I teach is also taught by another teacher at my university. Usually we do not both teach this subject during the same semester but sometimes we do. Students do not get to choose their teacher, the are assigned into one class or the other.
This has introduced a strange dynamic in that some of the other teacher's students have come to me asking for information about the subject, since they know I also teach it. So far, I've been quite hesitant to answer any such questions because I am worried about getting in between the other teacher and his students. I can imagine that I might have an answer that is different than the other teacher (perhaps my answer is wrong, perhaps my answer is right, and perhaps both of us are right but we have different ways of looking at a problem). The issue is compounded by the fact that I am from the West but the other teacher is Asian so there are cultural issues at play here (and I'm in Asia so it's not my culture).
I imagine this would be less of an issue in subjects like math where there is a specific formula but in management subjects the perspective of the teacher can change things significantly, especially if one teacher might be less strong in the subject than the other.
So, what should a teacher in this situation do? Refer the student to their teacher? If they feel they cannot get an acceptable answer then refer them to a search engine? Should I jump in if they feel they are lost and their teacher is not helping them understand (this seems like it could cause serious problems, even if handled well)?<issue_comment>username_1: My first question is, why are you (the faculty) both teaching the same class at the same university without talking to each other? I can understand the cultural differences, but this is even more of a reason to talk to your colleague about the class!
I would suggest (as posdef does in his comment) to talk to the other instructor about the class, offer to have him sit in on your class, and ask about collaboration. You could also ask to sit in on his class if you'd like, but you need to be careful to phrase your request so it is clear that you're there to gain insight into his class and not to provide criticism. I can't tell from your comment, "...if one teacher might be less strong in the subject than the other" if you believe he is the weak one or if you are, but regardless, you can both learn from each other.
Finally, it is in the best interest of both classes of students that you collaborate with the other instructor -- if both courses are listed as the same in the course catalog, the students should be able to expect that the class will cover roughly the same material.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **[Edit]** I'm assuming the questions asked are not ones where there is a consensus about the answers.
Here's the advice I give to students who come to me from the another instructors of the courses I also teach (sometimes the other instructors are teaching assistants): The person grading your exams is the other instructor, therefore it's in your best interest to get the answers from the other instructor.
The answer sounds perhaps like we're brushing off the student, but if we contradict the other instructor, it won't help the student.
Put yourself in the shoes of the other instructor. What if a student answered an exam question according to advice from the other instructor, but out of context, or according to another perspective. How would you grade it if you disagreed with the answer or point of view?
I teach software analysis and design at an undergrad level. Some students rarely come to class and answer questions based on analysis or design methods they used before. Some get upset when I qualify all questions "according to the process learned in class" because they can't write any old answer from their past experience. One instructor's style or method could be different (not necessarily wrong). But much of the evaluation in a course is based on what the student learned in that course.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You mentioned you’re from the West teaching in Asia. The school invited you from the West to teach while they already have instructors who can teach the same subject. I would think they all want to learn from you. Here, *they* are not only the students but also the faculty.
As posdef suggested in his comment, I would talk to the other instructor in some kind of informal meetings if I were you. You can talk to him about the class, the students and the department. You two are teaching the same course. There must be a lot of things you can share. In particular, you can ask him exactly this question and see what kind of solutions he would recommend. I think he would have a more insightful answer than most users on this site because he is in the same environment as you are.
Whether or not the other instructor is willing to talk to you is another issue. From what I know, most Asians are nice to the guests. If you are there for a tenure track position, he might see you as a competition. Then I think you should handle this matter in a formal manner. If you are not there on a permanent basis, I think informal meetings would be enough.
The most important thing is, what is the best interests for the students? Many Asian students believe there is always only one standard correct answer for every question. We know this is not always the case. Even for math related subjects, you can have multiple approaches to solve a problem. I suspect the students from the other class came to you to confirm the answer given by their instructor is the standard one. If that’s the case, you and the other instructor need to coordinate. Both need to explain to the students that there may not be only one standard answer per every question.
If the students came to you because they doubt their instructor or they don't get acceptable answers, you need to handle this with care. Respecting the teachers is an integral part of Asian culture. However, the best interests for the students is even more important. Talking to the other instructor in person is the first step to resolve this issue. You two together need to figure out how to tell the students the correct answers. Again, learning together is everybody’s goal.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/20 | 998 | 4,512 | <issue_start>username_0: Lately, I've been getting the impression that before I can conduct cutting edge research, I have to first master state of the art methods/techniques. Often, this requires spending (i.e. wasting) lots of time trying to replicate the results that others have already established (i.e. make sure that I can do what others have done first before moving on to other territory). When I try to master a new technique, I often find that it is extremely difficult because
1. Research papers don't seem to disclose enough details to replicate their results easily.
2. There are no advisors/colleagues that are familiar with these methods
3. Emailing the corresponding authors with questions about specific details about their research tend to go unanswered.
The only advice i've been given thus far is simply to read and re-read the research paper and dissect every little detail until I figure it out. But are there any other general strategies I can use to replicate others' results more quickly? In particular, I'm looking for strategies for replicating numerical results that require very careful implementations of mathematical algorithms.<issue_comment>username_1: The fact that you can't quickly and effortlessly do this is *exactly why this is not wasting lots of time*, assuming that you do in fact mean to build upon this very same research. You're learning how to solve problems in this arena, given an outline that you know works, but insufficient detail to actually implement it fully.
Other than that, for numerical results you simply need to do lots of testing to make sure at each stage the calculation comes out to be what you expect (and tests any important corner cases). For example, if something's piecewise polynomial, and you drop three points at random into every piece, and it's accurate to within machine precision, you've almost surely got it right, and if it's not you've almost surely got it wrong.
Now, once you're already well-versed in a field, you may write a paper which referees want you to compare to some other new result in the field. Replicating someone else's poorly-described new methods really *can* be a waste of time; you don't learn anything except that they left out a lot of fiddly details. (Editors may be sympathetic and let you skip it or e.g. use a common dataset instead.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As JeffE points out, trying to reproduce existing results before embarking on new endeavors is **not** a waste of time. It can be particularly useful, especially in tracking down issues that you have within your own code—or, perhaps, in the existing literature. My most-cited paper, and much of the research work currently ongoing within my group, came about precisely because I could *not* replicate an existing paper. As it turned out, there were some significant methodological problems in the existing literature, and this led to a fair bit of digging around, plus a lot of careful analysis to demonstrate what had happened and why. As I've also said, the issues we uncovered there indirectly led to a different line of inquiry that has already led to half a dozen additional manuscripts.
If you are determined to speed up the process, however, you might try to consider simplified versions of the research cases presented that can validate what you're working on. For instance, can you find a "prototype" problem whose solution would be known with your method as well as the existing methods? Can you find one or two test cases which can test most of what you're looking for? Can you devise a new problem that compares the two better than the existing cases, and is also simpler to execute?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I must agree with the answers posted above - it most certainly not a waste of time at all - my current supervisor explained to me that in a way, it is analogous to the saying "Learning to walk, before you can run" - if you can master what has been researched before, particularly learning the methodologies used - then you would have a greater chance of improving these methods and potentially further refining the results.
Also, consider that when the papers don't give much away, that this is a prime opportunity to develop your problem solving skills within the field that you are researching. I am doing the same, with a unique Android app as part of my research, I am entirely self taught from learning how other apps work.
Don't give up - keep on persevering, it is worth it!
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/05/20 | 757 | 3,438 | <issue_start>username_0: When writing a paper which, as an aside, talks about the design of a user interface on a particular piece of software, can one insert a (correctly labeled and referenced) screenshot of the software to help readers understand - or does that cause copyright issues?
For example, I wouldn't use a photo unless I held the copyright, or a diagram - but I'm unsure of the legal position of a screenshot...<issue_comment>username_1: Definitely, but one major issue will be resolution. A screen shot will typically yield a very low resoluton image which for most journals will be too low (recommendations are ypically 300 dpi in the final published figure size, which is usually impossible to achieve with screenshots. I would therefore recommend to make use of any possibility to zoom the window and then make a screen shot of the window as large as possible on the screen. If you are designing your user interface as you state in the question you could consider making a mock-up of the interface that is identical in every respect but which is based on higher resolution graphics, vectorized or bitmap based. Since you have access to all the original graphics elemnts this should not be difficult.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you're displaying the screenshot as part of a paper on user interface, the use of the screenshot will almost certainly fall under "fair use." Make sure you cite the software properly, and you should be all set.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Generally yes, you're allowed to use screenshots that you create yourself.
Depending on the publisher, they might ask for copyright approvals on the screenshots.
I believe that, as long as you yourself created the screenshot, you're the owner of it (just as if you take a photograph of something, you hold the copyright, not the creator of whatever you're photographing), but this is still, I believe, a legal grey area.
As mentioned, be sure that you provide a proper citation to the software.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: The answer, like many copyright questions, is complicated.
First, the images of the software interface is almost certainly copyrighted. As a result, the exclusive rights to reproduce images of the applicatoin lie with the copyright holder (i.e., the creator of the software.
*However*, as another answer has suggested, the use of a single screenshot of an application should almost certainly qualify as [Fair Use](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Use) under US copyright law or something similar and analogous under other systems. In other words, it's a small and relative inconsequential reproduction that you can do without having to ask for permission.
*However*, fair use is notoriously tricky and subjective. there is a multi-prong balancing test at the heart of fair use that is complicated and that makes it hard to know for sure whether a use if fair or not. As a result, many journals are risk averse and will systematically block many types of "probably fair" uses. I've had difficult conversations with production staff members and editors about the use of software screenshots before.
I would say go ahead and try to have the conversation with your journal editor or production staff. The worst thing they can do is ask you to take it out. This, of course, is what you would do preemptively now if you choose not to include it in the first place.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/20 | 2,073 | 8,555 | <issue_start>username_0: I just finished my masters and am currently working as a research assistant before starting a PhD in applied mathematics. I was doing some preliminary work for a possible project and derived some minor results which I find interesting, but in the end, we decided not to go ahead with the project.
I still find the minor results interesting and thought of digging a little bit deeper by myself. However, since the group is no longer interested in this, I would have to do this by myself, unsupervised. Is this a very bad thing? Or a good learning experience?
I had a bad experience doing unsupervised research (wasted a lot of time for no results). However, I know that as a PhD student, I must eventually publish first-authored papers. How do I know when to make the switch?<issue_comment>username_1: It is a common thread - see ["Go rogue too soon/too late" in 10 easy ways to fail a Ph.D.](http://matt.might.net/articles/ways-to-fail-a-phd/) and [Going Rogue at The Chronicle of Higher Education](http://chronicle.com/article/Going-Rogue/134896). An excerpt from the first:
>
> The advisor-advisee dynamic needs to shift over the course of a degree.
>
>
> Early on, the advisor should be hands on, doling out specific topics and helping to craft early papers.
>
>
> Toward the end, the student should know more than the advisor about her topic. Once the inversion happens, she needs to "go rogue" and start choosing the topics to investigate and initiating the paper write-ups. She needs to do so even if her advisor is insisting she do something else.
>
>
> The trick is getting the timing right.
>
>
> Going rogue before the student knows how to choose good topics and write well will end in wasted paper submissions and a grumpy advisor.
>
>
> On the other hand, continuing to act only when ordered to act past a certain point will strain an advisor that expects to start seeing a "return" on an investment of time and hard-won grant money.
>
>
> Advisors expect near-terminal Ph.D. students to be proto-professors with intimate knowledge of the challenges in their field. They should be capable of selecting and attacking research problems of appropriate size and scope.
>
>
>
Personally, I have a lot of experience with unsupervised research (yes, usually *wasted a lot of time for no results*), starting from high school.
Sure, doing advisor's project is much safer (as, in some sense, (s)he is responsible for the big picture, references, judging which result is *good enough*) and allows to forget about doubts (for good or bad) and concentrate on work.
However, what I've discovered after 1.5 of my PhD (mostly "going rogue") is that there are two important things:
* asking experts (or peers), and
* day-to-day collaboration.
Sure, you can have an expert *and* a collaborator in the same person of your advisor, but as long as you are not afraid of talking to other people and have some knowledge in the topic, it shouldn't be hard to ask experts appropriate questions.
When it comes to collaboration - it may be trickier (but not if you locally have people with an interest overlap).
On contrary, working alone for months on a theoretical problem, with little feedback, may be very hard (both technically and psychologically). [I've learnt it the hard way](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/5790/49). It is not a problem for one research line, but it is when all research is done alone (may be inefficient and depressive, *perhaps* unless you are in a *deep love* with it).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Basically, the only restrictions are issues related to funding. If your funding is intended for you to work on a specific topic, then your primary efforts should be given to the designated topic. However, you can, if so motivated, pursue the research topic independently. In mathematics, this might not be such a huge issue, as the infrastructural demands are not so large (except for some applied math projects). However, in other disciplines, where this "unsupervised research" may require experimental supplies and other resources, this is a *much* bigger issue. In the latter case, you **must** obtain approval from the PI whose equipment, material, and other resources you will be using!
If your time is "unrestricted," in the sense that it is not tied to any particular project or program, then you should talk with your supervisor to see if you can use some of your "normal" time to devote to the "side" project. If you can, great; if you can't, then again, this needs to be "on the side"—beyond your main project.
As for the question of doing "first-authored" research, well, that transition process, in many respects, *is* the goal of the PhD! If you are to be a successful researcher, then during your doctoral studies you will learn how to do research independently, and eventually unsupervised. (Moreover, you will hopefully also have the chance to learn how to supervise others!)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It is not necessarily a bad thing to forge ahead on your own and it will certainly be a learning experience. It is definitely a good thing to try this, because it will demonstrate and help reinforce that you are an independent researcher, something which you need to be at the end of your PhD studies.
But this is not without some **risk**.
Part of the role of the supervision that would otherwise be provided is to improve your skills as a researcher and writer of scientific texts. Without this guidance, your skills at the end of your PhD may not be as good as they could be. You may have gaps in your knowledge that would need to be filled. The presentation of scientific material in your writing may end up being suboptimal, because you won't have someone to proposed better ways of writing. And worse still, your ideas may not end up being the best they could be, because you won't have someone questioning them and your assumptions, ultimately forcing you to produce better versions of your ideas.
I've seen it before. Some highly independent students I've seen in action fail to follow recognised mathematical conventions, produce new notations for existing concepts, miss key references and lack understanding of key concepts that would help improve their work, and so on.
Independence is a good trait, but try to take advantage of opportunities to receive guidance from your supervisor(s) while you can.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: My former Ph.D. advisor's philosophy is that a student should become a teacher of their supervisor. He seems to give the green light when the student
1. explains their own research problem clearly,
2. shows a clear sign of familiarity with all relevant work,
3. puts their work in context,
4. gives a convincing argument about why it's important and interesting,
5. looks they can make it, and, somewhat more importantly,
6. chose a topic that isn't too unfashionable to the extent that devoting their time during their Ph.D. student phase to that kind of topic is a career suicide.
I wrote my first paper when I was a second year grad student, and my first joint paper with my former Ph.D. supervisor is after I got my degree. My friend who got his Ph.D. from the same advisor at the same time as me was also like this, and he's doing pretty well in academia. So probably all that matters when it comes to starting your own math research is if you're ready for it. And if you're ready, I don't think your advisor can talk you out of it anyway. At least, randome guys on the internet like us surely can't.
So, I'd say if you're being honest to yourself and still confident that you know about your research topic better than your advisor, and if you can get him interested in your research, it should be fine.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Think of research as a learning paradigm, whenever you learn something new spend time asking yourself how you would develop it if what you just learned was the state of the art, and what interesting directions would be. As you learn more about the topic you can see whether you were right. This makes learning to do research a constant part of your life rather than something you are learning to do when you start your thesis or dissertation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Performing unsupervised research is also a great way to develop the self-discipline needed for a PhD and developing your own research strategies. This time could be considered a valuable time for personal and academic growth.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/20 | 2,197 | 9,833 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a computer science doctoral student working on machine learning (ML) research. Meanwhile, a startup approached me to consult/advise them in areas related to algorithms in ML. Needless to say a lot of work that I do as part of my research encompasses ML deeply. They want me to sign a mutual non disclosure agreement (NDA)/ non compete clause before i engage as an independent consultant with them, while pursuing my program full-time. In this context, they know well that I will be pursuing my program for at least the next 3 years.
I have a few problems here.
1. The confidentiality information covers:
>
> ...techniques, know-how, processes, algorithms... related to current and future proposed products and services... and includes, without limitation, their respective information concerning research, experimental work, development, design details and specifications, engineering..."
>
>
>
I am worried about this part mostly. Most ML research uses some form of classification or clustering in various domains. Every other startup is mining some patterns that they may use to their advantage. The methods used are generally known in the ML community and published in existing literature. Can a startup claim that an "algorithm" (which already exists in the literature) was used by me in some form at a later point of time for work unrelated to that domain? Additionally, I intend to use or publish research methods developed as part of my doctoral research during its course or in future. Does "without limitation ...respective information concerning research, experimental work, development" restrict me from doing this i.e can the organization restrict me from publishing work done in my doctoral program by claiming that I was also working with them during this period, so they have a right to what i publish during this time?
2. Regarding confidential information:
>
> "...if orally disclosed, designated as confidential at the time of disclosure and marked in writing as “confidential”."
>
>
>
Does this mean that anything said orally related to ML is considered confidential?
3. Non-Compete clause:
>
> "...with a direct competitor of Company while engaged with Company and for thirty-six months following the termination or completion of this engagement..."
>
>
>
As an ML researcher, I will be working on ML in the future years to come. Asking me to stop working in ML for 36 months is equivalent to asking "don't work for 3 years". Additionally, the startup does work which is similar to the kind of work a lot of analytics/data science related firms do. Most of ML research broadly falls into pattern mining in some form which almost all organizations engage in. In this context, does 36 months not seem a bit unreasonable?
4. What exactly can i get them to write in the NDA which informs that they are aware of my research position and do not expect IP for my academic research?<issue_comment>username_1: You are dealing with a legal document, and you are asking questions about legal language. **The only way to get answers to your questions is to consult a legal expert.** Any advice you receive here will necessarily be inferior to that dispensed by the legal expert.
Having said that, you're asking good questions, and during the negotiation part of the discussion you can and should discuss your concerns with a legal expert and with the company representatives. Negotiations are a normal part of any contract discussion. The document you have was written by their lawyers to provide his client—the company—with maximum legal protection, in their best interests. The job of your lawyer is to provide yourself with the same protection, in *your* best interests.
If you are concerned about the cost of hiring a lawyer, do the math; the total amount you expect to receive from the consulting should be significantly more than the cost of the lawyer, and the potential cost to you of not hiring a lawyer may be pretty large.
Regarding finding one, speak with the faculty in your department; chances are at least one of them has consulted in the past and can provide you with both advice and hopefully the name of a qualified lawyer.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Non-disclosure documents are almost always trying to squeeze the employee. Here are a few specifics that I can glean from the snippets that you've posted.
I'm not a lawyer, but honestly I don't think you need a lawyer to interpret much of the language in an NDA.
ONE: The NDA
------------
First, the NDA claiming that it covers processes and know-how relating ML methods refer to anything that you are working on *related to current and future proposed products and services*.
So let's say Company X is working on, let's say, movie recommendations and uses, for example, SVM (support vector machines) and collaborative filtering for the bulk of their recommendations. This does not mean that you can no longer talk about SVM and collaborative filtering with anyone - it DOES mean that you cannot talk about their particular implementation of SVM, you cannot tell people how they're doing collaborative filtering (ex: their features, their weights), you cannot mention what's in their databases and so forth. In fact, you probably can't tell people that the company uses SVM and collaborative filtering unless they tell you that you're allowed. If you develop some new technique of doing a movie recommender, you cannot tell people outside the company about it or publish it unless you get permission from the company. The key part of non-disclosure is that you basically need permission before you can talk about certain things, but common knowledge is common knowledge - it's not like the company can restrict you from talking about SVM and collaborative filtering. But if that's on their "super secrets" list of stuff, you better not go to a conference, give out your business card, and then say, "Well I know a lot about collaborative filtering and SVM".
Usually, "without limitation" *DOES* cover stuff that you work on outside of your work hours if it's directly relevant to the company. If there's a remote chance that your dissertation work and your publications might be inspired by, let's say, solving a company's problem or working with the company's data, then they actually do have the right to restrict you from disclosing your work without their permission, and may in fact claim copyright as well.
On the bright side, there are possible recourses for you. You can talk to them and ask them explicitly that you want to *retain* your copyright and that you want to *reserve the right to publish* about algorithms and so forth that you develop while you're there. You can promise to not disclose the company name and line of work. You can ensure that any papers you write go through their legal department so they can rubber-stamp it before delivery. These are things though that you want to ask about before you sign the NDA. Often, you CAN negotiate on terms like this, but it depends on their legal team.
TWO: Confidential
-----------------
It seems to me that this is pretty clear. We've all taken formal logic, yes? That would mean that if something is orally disclosed to you, told to you that it's confidential, AND marked in writing as confidential, then you cannot talk about it. Unless they tell you, "Our implementation of SVM is confidential" and then point to the document that says, "The company's SVM implementation is confidential" then presumably you can talk about it.
That said, it seems like their lawyers made a mistake here, because you'd think it should be an 'OR' relationship here - "mentioned as confidential at time of disclosure OR mentioned in writing as confidential".
In any case, since SVM is basically public knowledge, most of what I mentioned under 1 would apply here. SVM and collaborative filtering and other stuff like that is public knowledge. However, don't say "Company X does SVM and collaborative filtering" in public.
THREE: Non-compete clauses
--------------------------
I can't really comment as well on this as I have no experience with non-compete clauses, but in some states they're not even legal (ex: California) and if they're phrased incorrectly to be unenforceable you might be off the hook.
I'd be more concerned about "who their main competitors are" rather than how long the agreement is. Such an agreement wouldn't prevent you from working in ML research, but it might prevent you from working at Netflix if your current company is in movie recommendations. Much of the time the non-complete clauses are made to prevent an employee from stealing corporate secrets and other implicit knowledge.
FOUR: Exceptions
----------------
Don't worry about where you'd put that stuff, you're not going to be writing the NDA.
You should bring all of your concerns with them though. The main thing is that you've brought it up with them and possibly written it down, maybe in an email, so that they can get their legal department to put it in the right location.
All of that said, I think your main concern is that "I can't talk about machine learning while working at this company." I'm 99% sure that isn't going to be the case. They don't care that you talk about general ML techniques or continue to do ML research, but will care if you're exposing corporate secrets, developing algorithms that might help their business with their data but not keeping it secret, or going to work for their competitors right after you finish with them.
Before hiring your own lawyer, I'd simply advise asking theirs about every clause in the NDA. That would save you some legal fees. If they are unable to answer, or if the answers aren't satisfactory, then you can consider getting your own lawyer to go through it.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/20 | 614 | 2,650 | <issue_start>username_0: I don't know if here is the best place to ask that but I'm finishing my master degree in pure mathematics and I would like to travel and know another countries before enter into a doctorate school. In my country with a master degree you can teach in a private university or even in a public university with tenure in small villages or in public universities with 2-years contract in bigger cities.
I would like to know if in your own home country is easy to work in a temporary job as a "professor" or be a permanent professor with tenure in smaller areas with a master degree.
**Remark**
I know that is impossible to teach pure mathematics with only a master degree, but there are a lot of faculties of civil and food engineer, actuarial sciences, computer sciences, etc... which have logic, calculus, linear algebra, etc... courses, i.e., simpler courses with doesn't necessarily need a PHD professor to teach it.
Thanks a lot<issue_comment>username_1: In the United States, a master's degree typically qualifies you to teach at the junior college or community college level, and also to teach as a lecturer at the university level. However, you should know that in mathematics there is substantially less supply of these jobs than there is demand for them. That is, they are hard to find and don't pay very well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If I've understood your question correctly, you are asking if you can work with your master's degree as an instructor in mathematics while you are touring the world before beginning a doctoral program.
If that is indeed the case, the answer is **maybe**, although it would be very difficult to accomplish.
The reason for this is that you would likely have to surmount visa issues, which can make it difficult for foreign nationals to gain employment in another country. You'd probably have to line up the position *before* you traveled, which would complicate things even further.
However, another thing to keep in mind is that in most universities, the math courses are taught out of the math department—including "service" courses taught for other departments, such as CS, engineering, and physical science. Even in these cases, first priority likely goes to faculty, existing teaching staff, and graduate students within the department. Only if there remains a need for additional teaching staff will they be likely to offer you a contract. And, as username_1 points out, they're unlikely to pay very well. (But then again, I suppose this is just a means of supporting yourself during your travels, in which case this might not be such a bad deal.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/21 | 772 | 3,119 | <issue_start>username_0: Based on [this other question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10117/is-it-possible-to-get-admitted-to-a-m-sc-degree-in-the-u-s-if-you-already-hold) where the OP asks whether or not a second Masters degree is possible, I realized that I am not sure what the difference is between *Master of Science* and *Master of Technology*.
I have graduated from a Swedish university and after 5 years of studies (Bologna process) I got my undergrad (*kandidat*) and masters (*examen*) together as it is very common here. I double checked my diploma now and even though I have graduated from the technical faculty and an engineering program, I am given a *Master of Science*. I believe there is no *Master of Technology* degree in Sweden, so I am not sure what it means. To make the matters worse, I stumbled upon another similar degree, *Master of Engineering*.
I would really appreciate some insight into the differences of these degrees, and whether or not they would be considered interchangeable abroad (read: outside Europe).<issue_comment>username_1: At some schools, there may be differences in the formal degree requirements, such as the requirement of coursework or completion of a thesis; at others, including the graduate school I attended, the distinction is purely a departmental issue—engineering departments give out M.S. or M.Eng. degrees, while science departments give out only M.S. degrees. I think, from an admissions perspective, in most cases, these would be viewed as largely interchangeable. Some schools may have very particular entrance requirements, but these would be noted as part of the admissions instructions.
Where I now work, we don't specify the nature of the master's degree required for enrollment as a PhD student; any relevant master's degree will suffice, and the exact title of the degree is more or less immaterial. (We do have to petition if it's a foreign degree, but this is mostly a *pro forma* process.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are some differences, especially in the concept of the programs M.Eng./M.Tech. and M.Sc (and M.A. obviously too).
From my experience, and [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_Engineering) states this also, the M.Eng./M.Tech. degrees are rather given by Universities of Applied Sciences (at least in Germany, Canada, Finland etc,) and seldomly by Universities focusing on research. Any program that is research oriented will thus very likely give M.Sc. degrees.
The M.Eng. is even given as an undergraduate Master in the UK (see the Wikipedia Link) that gets granted immediately (without a bachelors in between).
For the career of a graduate, the title itself is not too important as username_1 mentioned, since any employer will have a look at what's inside (= the student track record).
Because there are so many slightly different programs, especially in computer/information engineering/technology/sciences I am not sure where universities draw the line regarding the "not granting a 2nd masters degree in the same field/area/discipline" policy.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/21 | 835 | 3,552 | <issue_start>username_0: I am entering my senior year of undergraduate study in Computer Science at a small, primarily undergraduate institution. I plan to attend graduate school and pursue a PhD in Computer Science and Mathematics, my main goal to teach. The school I attend is quite small, and is all but unknown outside our geographic region. As such, I've attempted to add as many positive bullets to my CV as possible, mainly because I feel I will have to fight harder than my colleagues at larger universities to get into a great program.
One of the things I have attempted to add to my vita is teaching experience. I have had the opportunity to tutor in our Mathematics Tutoring Center for a couple years now, and have fallen in love. I have also had the pleasure of assisting a professor in her Freshmen CS labs. Last fall I spoke with her about increasing my duties to more than just fielding questions as the students type their programs. I wanted to start grading lab submissions, and perhaps even hold office hours. She was delighted that I wanted the increased responsibility, but sharply objected to calling it a "TA" position.
Is there a stigma of assigning the title TA to an undergraduate?<issue_comment>username_1: A teaching assistantship (TA) is a formal job category at most universities, which implies that you are being paid a specific wage for teaching duties while a graduate student. Consequently, you would be misrepresenting your work on the CV if you called yourself a teaching assistant, because you are not formally a graduate student.
At the university level, another issue may be that while many undergraduates do participate in teaching responsibilities at many schools, this is often in the form of tutoring programs and informal arrangements. Part of the reason for this is that many universities want to be able to claim a higher percentage of teaching duties are done by faculty than is really the case. Calling undergraduates graders and tutors helps to shift off the balance, since they are not officially "teaching staff," and therefore wouldn't be included in such time accounting.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, the answer is: teaching assistantship (TA) is a formal job category at most universities, which entails a specific combination of job duties. Those job duties go beyond what you are doing. Therefore, you would be misrepresenting your work on your CV if you called yourself a TA, because you have not been formally appointed as a TA (and because a TA would be expected to take on additional duties beyond what you have been doing).
Note that this is a little different from username_1's answer. In many institutions, undergrads can be appointed as a TA, under certain circumstances. That doesn't mean that you can just call yourself a TA if you feel like it. For instance, assisting informally or helping with grading papers doesn't necessarily make you a TA; it's not unusual to hire undergraduates to help with those tasks, under some other job title -- but not as a TA. A TA is a very specific job title, and unless you've been appointed under that job title, you should not call yourself a TA.
And I think you're misinterpreting the situation, when you presume there is a stigma against hiring undergrads as a TA. I suspect it's more likely that there is a different explanation: that your instructor reacted negatively because you were proposing to describe yourself as a TA when you have not actually been formally appointed as a TA.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/22 | 738 | 3,124 | <issue_start>username_0: In my field (biology), the end of the introduction in a research article generally ends with a list of hypotheses that the researchers tested. A common structure of this part of a research paper is:
```
'We tested (1) hypothesis X (2) hypothesis Y and (3) hypothesis Z'.
```
The research papers I read often test between two and four hypotheses. I'm interested in how the researchers generally arrive at this list of two and four hypotheses. Do they start with a list of 10+ hypotheses, and tick off the ones that they fail to say anything useful about? Or do they stick with the same two to four hypotheses throughout a research project? Or do researchers not begin with any hypotheses, and fit some suitable hypotheses after checking their results?<issue_comment>username_1: A teaching assistantship (TA) is a formal job category at most universities, which implies that you are being paid a specific wage for teaching duties while a graduate student. Consequently, you would be misrepresenting your work on the CV if you called yourself a teaching assistant, because you are not formally a graduate student.
At the university level, another issue may be that while many undergraduates do participate in teaching responsibilities at many schools, this is often in the form of tutoring programs and informal arrangements. Part of the reason for this is that many universities want to be able to claim a higher percentage of teaching duties are done by faculty than is really the case. Calling undergraduates graders and tutors helps to shift off the balance, since they are not officially "teaching staff," and therefore wouldn't be included in such time accounting.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, the answer is: teaching assistantship (TA) is a formal job category at most universities, which entails a specific combination of job duties. Those job duties go beyond what you are doing. Therefore, you would be misrepresenting your work on your CV if you called yourself a TA, because you have not been formally appointed as a TA (and because a TA would be expected to take on additional duties beyond what you have been doing).
Note that this is a little different from username_1's answer. In many institutions, undergrads can be appointed as a TA, under certain circumstances. That doesn't mean that you can just call yourself a TA if you feel like it. For instance, assisting informally or helping with grading papers doesn't necessarily make you a TA; it's not unusual to hire undergraduates to help with those tasks, under some other job title -- but not as a TA. A TA is a very specific job title, and unless you've been appointed under that job title, you should not call yourself a TA.
And I think you're misinterpreting the situation, when you presume there is a stigma against hiring undergrads as a TA. I suspect it's more likely that there is a different explanation: that your instructor reacted negatively because you were proposing to describe yourself as a TA when you have not actually been formally appointed as a TA.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/22 | 5,108 | 22,552 | <issue_start>username_0: When evaluating and grading students' work in technical fields (like computer science or mathematics), I often face ones that are really messy, sometimes even unreadable (I mean structure, not - handwriting). It's not clear at all what part belongs to what or what is the final result. Instead of spending a lot of time trying to figure out if there is a good result buried somewhere in the mess, I'm tempted to just fail such a work as unreadable.
While these (I'd say) formal aspect don't reflect the ability of the student to solve the problem, it strongly reflects his/her ability to present the solution. And in their future professions, it won't be much good that they can solve problems, if they're not able to present the solution to someone else. Or for example grant agencies simply reject proposals that fail even slightly given formal criteria.
My questions are:
1. Should the evaluation include evaluation of readability, proper structure etc. for example in a textual form (without impacting the final grade perhaps), something like *"The solution is completely unreadable."* or for a larger work *"The solution lacks a proper structure - there is no introduction or conclusion of what have been accomplished."* etc.?
2. Should such deficiencies be also reflected in the grade? If so, how much? Would it be acceptable to even fail a work just because it's completely unreadable?<issue_comment>username_1: Ideally, no. The main problem when evaluating is expressed by a saying in my native language "muddy writing, muddy thinking". Essentially, if you cannot decipher what is written, either because it is sloppy writing or poorly expressed, then one faces problems when grading. Students often complain about grading where they sense they are misinterpreted etc. This is when we cannot understand what they are writing. Often, I believe, we also give people the benefit of the doubt and grade more leniently than what the verbatim answer would state. This is, of course, never picked up by a student. Hence a catch 22.
What can we do? The problem lies in the examination.
First, we can provide clear guidelines about clarity of language and writing. This should be pointed out long before the exam, in fact early in their education. A study of Swedish students showed that they learn two ways of writing in pre-university levels. In languages, focus is on grammar, spelling and language but not content; whereas in other subjects focus is on content and not language. When they arrive at the university they do not realize that both are important; we need to tell them.
Second, we can chose other means of examination where those with poor hand-writing can do better. Examples can be many: from essays through take homes to verbal and of course highly depending on the course, contents, level etc. Examples of the means of grading is to have external graders (more resources!) or to do as one of my teachers did; ask students to request everyone writes the exam with the pencil, and then after the exam use a pen to add corrections to their own exame as the teacher went through the exam. The exam was then collected and graded by the teacher. I mention this as an example, fully realizing it would not work in every situation.
So the answer for me is no, but our assessment is always tainted by many factors whether we want it or not. To reduce the element of subjectivity is what we would be looking for.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the most important part of your post is in your comment
>
> Or for example grant agencies simply reject proposals that fail even slightly given formal criteria.
>
>
>
If a student isn't corrected for sloppy work while in school, when will he or she improve? The question really boils down to
>
> *How best can we as instructors give guidance to students so that they will succeed in the future?*
>
>
>
Evaluations in an educational setting can serve many purposes, but fundamentally they should be used as a tool to help students succeed. Obviously, you have to be careful because a poor grade on a transcript can have long-term ramifications, but ignoring sloppy or unreadable work by trying to see through it is doing a disservice to the student on a particularly key issue: *communication of an idea is as important as the idea itself.*
To answer your questions:
>
> 1. Should the evaluation include evaluation of readability, proper structure etc...?
>
>
>
Absolutely. To ignore this would be bad pedagogy. Determining *how* to relate this to the student without causing a misunderstanding about the idea itself is the difficult part. Encouragement or direction to seek out writing help is a good idea, as is having students re-write or re-submit work that is sloppy. Hopefully the work improves throughout the course; being picky at the beginning of a course can set a good standard for the rest of the course.
>
> 2. Should such deficiencies be also reflected in the grade? If so, how much? Would it be acceptable to even fail a work just because it's completely unreadable?
>
>
>
The answer to this ties directly back into the first question. I would suggest letting students re-write or submit material without penalty (or with minimal penalty) early on in a course, with the understanding that they must improve by the end. If your only assessment is a final project, consider allowing a re-write with an incomplete grade. But, if that is your policy, I'd strongly suggest providing a time for draft review well before the final project is due in order to minimize the need for this route. As always, I would also spell out in a syllabus your policy and the fact that presentation is a part of the course, and I would also discuss this on the first day of class (with examples of past work that is sloppy!).
You've posed a hard question, but an extremely important one. I probably suggest rejecting 30% of the papers I review for conferences simply because they are unreadable. Most of the time I don't even get to the idea behind the work before I realize that it doesn't matter what the idea is because it is too poorly written (and this ends up in the review). I want more papers that are well presented, because I'm certain some of the papers I give poor reviews to because of this problem have great ideas behind them! Teachers that encourage students to improve their writing and presentation are necessary for this to occur.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: While I do agree with username_1's answer that we should make it completely clear to students what they need to do to have their work understood, I feel differently about the impacting on assessment.
In industry, the ability to write readable (which means maintainable) code is critical. The ability to write a really cool, super efficient block of logic which nobody can understand is simply producing a ticking time bomb which will explode as soon as someone else goes to edit it. Students need to know that you are not just being a 'stuffly old prof' but rather that there are certain expectations from the profession and they must live up to them. Coding is not just about making a solution - it's about making a solution which will not explode 12-18 months later.
On the academic side, I also have students who have similar problems where they do not care much about being careful in their writing. I generally handle them like this:
1. If I can understand it, but it is difficult, then I will mark them based on the overall quality of their work. If it is difficult to understand then the quality of their work is not great. Even if they are far smarter than me, they should be able to write in such a way that they can be understood.
2. If I cannot understand it, then I simply fail them. They are responsible for showing me that they understand and if they do not do that, then I must fail them - this is my responsibility.
So, yes, educate them. However, I would not let poor quality slide.
I try to remind my students of the story of the family. Every happy family is happy in the same way. Every unhappy family is unhappy in a different way. The students are usually lost at first, then I explain to them that for the family to be happy they must get 100 things right. But, get anyone of them wrong and the family is unhappy. If they want to be happy then they must get it all right.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Proper presentation of results is a vitally important part of modern research. It's also a necessary skill for *any* field of work into which an academically trained individual will enter after graduation.
If one does not learn how to exchange information with other people and organizations, the results can be catastrophic. <NAME>'s *Visual Information* uses the *Challenger* explosion as a case study in exactly what can go wrong when communication skills are ignored at a fundamental level. The launch was not aborted because the engineers just provided a bunch of disorganized data to management, who couldn't parse it out to understand that it was too cold to launch.
So, as much as possible, presentation and organization of material *should* be considered when assigning grades. Now there are situations when it would be unfair to penalize: for example, in the context of a timed exam, where students may feel rushed and may not be writing neatly. (However, I also feel that this is a largely contrived circumstance, which doesn't reflect true understanding in many important ways.) In any situation where they have had time to independently prepare their work and submit it, then presentation and writing style should definitely be taken into account.
However, at the same time, unless the class is a writing class, then it's unfair to fail or strongly penalize a student who has turned in work that would otherwise be satisfactory, but was not put together well. Personally, when I am grading project reports, I "control" for this by making a decision on what the grade for the technical content of the project. I then give a bonus "partial" grade level for a well-organized and well-written report, and similarly deduct a "partial" grade if it's substandard. So, for instance a report that would have gotten a B+ could become either an A- or a B.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: When I set marking rubrics for my students' work, I usually include two main areas: Clarity and Contribution.
**Clarity** specifically addresses whether the student has communicated their ideas (or answered the questions) in a clear and unambiguous manner. As such, poor presentation or (really) bad grammar impacts this portion of the mark.
I generally don't detract from the student mark for `speeling errurs` [sic]; even though I am a native English speaker, I am an Australian working in the US and am frequently in a quandary over whether to use Australian or American spelling.
My present students are generally from non-English speaking backgrounds, and I find their clarity generally very good, even though their turns of phrase sometimes seem awkward to me. I give feedback on this awkwardness but, unless it impacts the clarity of their presentation, I don't dock marks for it.
**Contribution** is used to address the correctness or fitness for purpose of the work.
I also add a further C, **Collaboration**, if the work is a group project.
---
**To directly answer your questions: Yes, and Yes.**
As a side-issue: Because many of my students are non-native English speakers, I also tend to allow double-submission of assignments. The students may submit their assignments twice before the due date.
I give an undertaking that I will do my best to give early feedback on an early submission (because I am an adjunct, I make it clear that "early" means the submission has to happen before a weekend before the due date). The students can then take my feedback and implement it on their new submission. I find this improves the quality of the presentation (clarity), but not so much on the contribution (unless they were really, really out of line on the first submission).
Unless the students do a complete re-write, the second marking is usually just a "delta" / "diff" on the first.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: What is your evaluation measuring? Are you grading a 2nd grade math test, or are you evaluating a doctoral thesis on neuroscience?
If it's the former, then no; sloppiness and structure take a backseat to getting the subject matter correct. The reason is your focus should be on evaluating the crucial element of the subject being evaluated. At early levels of development, there must be some leniency given to presentation in order to focus on the fundamentals.
Of course, there is a reasonable limit to how sloppy or unreadable something can be before the evaluation ceases to be useful. Intentionally sloppy responses relying on confusion in the hopes of gaining partial credit don't deserve any credit at all.
If you're evaluating a student in a near-professional setting, e.g. university and higher, then it makes sense to consider presentation as part of the grade. Well structured, carefully written responses should get more credit than sloppy and careless ones. Presentation becomes important because in the "real world" people evaluate you based on the whole package. Nobody is going to buy a bottle of Tylenol with a hand-scribbled, barely legible label. Likewise, even superficial details should be considered important in high level evaluations.
I was a sloppy student through primary school and even most of high school. Many teachers simply refused to grade some papers that were unacceptably sloppy, and others graded what they could within reason. None of those teachers who refused to grade a paper stick out in my mind, nor did their insistence on neatness change my behavior. I excelled in the subjects where my understanding of the core materials mattered most, and did not focus my attention on subjects where presentation was considered more important than the concepts being taught.
Overall, I graduated in the top 5% of my high school and went on to a good college. By the time I got my masters degree, my value of structure and presentation has improved sufficiently that I can survive in a professional environment. Becoming a professional, I believe, is the goal of "teaching" organizational skills.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I am not a teacher, but I am in my second year of my associates working toward my bachelors. My opinion is that yes you should, it will only hurt them later in life. In high school I passed my classes with C or a C+, now in college I am getting As and Bs. The reason is not that I am magically smarter, it is that I apply myself at least twice as hard.
There is so much information out there to learn anything, APA or MLA, and sites like *Grammar Girl* and reference generators. I think spelling should and grammar should be graded hard, maybe not at the first of the semester.
If they are bad at first, correct them and give them places to go for examples of the correct way(s) to do it. If by mid-term they have not figured it out then grade them hard. All work should flow; if it does not, let them know now because in their career they will not get a nice correction and time to fix it. I work my butt off in school and feel as if I get graded hard, but it is when the teacher gives good feedback that I learn and make the change. So giving them a grade lower than an A needs an explanation of what they need to fix.
This is why we are seeing on job descriptions -Bachelors from a reputable University- teachers need to be hard so that the student walks away with a real education not just a piece of paper that cost them thousands of dollars.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
You as an instructor may see hundreds upon hundreds of papers a term. The students do not have that same luxury for comparison. If penmanship and other elements of style are important to you as an instructor, then as a student, I suggest you express your standards and expectations up front, even if it seems that is something I should know and do coming into your class.
I expect no less from an employer as an employee.
1. Note the degree of impact for presentation on the syllabus, even if there is no plus points for exemplary, and only negative points awarded for substandard.
2. Provide a sanitized modicum of 'bad', 'passable', and 'exemplary' presentation for comparison.
3. Encourage them to seek clarification or special consideration up front, as opposed to seeking remedy to penalties after the fact. They may have certain existing conditions which precludes them from generally meeting those standards. Or more commonly, they may not have been exposed or acclimated to the technical writing style you are accustomed to in that particular field..
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I particularly like the answer that suggested having rubrics to identify criteria such as clarity.
When it comes to a situation where work is completely unreadable, I apply the pedagogical pattern known as [Grade it again, Sam](https://extras.springer.com/1999/978-3-642-63632-5/OFFLINE/PPP/PP55.HTM). Very often, the student who submits unreadable work is simply not making an effort. When I refuse the work using this pattern and give the student a second chance to improve readability, the second work is always better and subsequent works are usually also better.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: When you discuss formatting constraints of the grant application process, you're getting close to a solution, I think. There are really two components here; one of these is structural/formatting criteria, and the other is clarity. When you're in a situation where structural requirements and great care are part of the lesson you're teaching, I find it best to refuse to grade work until it has been presented in the proper format, and apply whatever late-work structure you normally use.
This teaches the lesson that formatting is not optional fluff, but is instead a precondition to being taken seriously. That said, if you're going to follow this method, your instructions on format should themselves be crystal clear and unambiguous. Ask a competent peer to follow your formatting instructions and see if they can arrive at the right format.
The second question about messiness is more troublesome, and to some extent your response should depend on where you're situated within the broader track your students will follow, and what constitutes messy/sloppy. I think your response should be two-pronged:
1. I wouldn't advocate failing students outright for unreadable work, but let them know you can't grade the assignment until you can understand it, and ask them to discuss their work with you one-on-one. Like above, allow your late-work policy to degrade the value of their work if they don't come address it swiftly. I ran into a few students who had a sense of what academic writing should sound like, with the result that they were completely incomprehensible when trying to parrot a voice they had no real command of. But they were able to explain it in person. This method allows you to show how imperative clear communication is--it's a precondition to being graded--and avoid invalidating what may have otherwise been good work. The ultimate penalty is based on how quickly the students resolve the problems with their work.
2. Include some metric of style/quality/organization on your rubric. While I understand the inclination to see writing as something students should already know how to do--and that you probably don't see yourself as an instructor of writing--I think rubrics should always always always reflect the qualities you actually expect of good work in your field. Your rubric telegraphs your own priorities, and if you don't communicate clarity and style as a concern, it shouldn't come as a surprise when students think it doesn't matter.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: As a current student of computer science (master level) I can say that commenting on the readability of work from students, providing pointers and even taking it into account when grading is of great importance. It will benefit the student a lot in the long run.
At my university, many professors point out bad readability and incoherent structure, although mostly on project/paper type assignments and less on weekly homework assignments.
However, it is considered important in all cases. I'm now writing my thesis and have written two research papers as part of research projects (for publication) and the comments I got on structure and readability greatly improved my writing.
Also, I see from fellow students that they write solutions without providing reasoning and without introducing the topic and the problem they are solving. I believe this is very bad style (for group work this has unfortunately led to me rewriting the group documents many times simply to improve the structure). However, students don't often see a problem because it gets accepted by the teacher.
An important note though is that I think grammar and spelling should be of significantly less importance. For instance, the Chinese students in our class often forget the word "the" in writing (all documents are written in English for my master). Although this affects readability and is often pointed out by teachers, it is generally not considered an error significant enough to deduct points.
The line between decreased readability due to grammar/spelling and actual incomprehensibility is hard to determine, and should be determined on a case by case basis. Still it is important that students also learn this.
In short, definitely help students in improving their structure and on communicating their ideas and force students to do so by making it affect the grade! It will only help them like it helped me!
EDIT: As a side note, handwritten solutions are generally not accepted where I study, but if YOU are requesting handwritten solutions, it would be unfair to deduct points for bad handwriting. Some people just don't have a nice handwriting, an unfortunate result of the modern computer era. If students CAN but don't have to hand in handwritten solutions, then it should affect the grade as it is the students choice to write instead of type (if it significantly affects the readability of course).
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/22 | 737 | 2,887 | <issue_start>username_0: I understand **honour societies** have been around for years and it is a tradition more prevalent in the western world to recognise outstanding academic talent.
The largest honour society is perhaps the [Golden Key](http://www.goldenkey.org/) which operates worldwide and has over 2 million members. It provides a range of services to members, including leadership training, networking and the opportunity to do good. Membership is by invitation only and only those who are in the top 15% of their class or high performing graduate students are eligible. The eligibility is based solely on academic performance.
I presume being invited to join a honour society is an 'honour' in itself, as the mere mention of this affiliation on the CV would indicate that you are a top achiever.
**Question 1:** Does membership of honour society carry any professional weight?
(i.e. does it give any additional advantages?)
**Note:** Honour society is not the same as professional society. The latter, as I understand it, is open to all persons in a particular field (irrespective of their academic achievement but as long as certain criteria are met, e.g. successful registration as a teacher to join a teacher's union).
**Question 2:** Are there other honour societies in addition to the Golden Key (which seems to be the most dominant one)?
**PS:** I am unsure of the tag, so putting CV. Please update!
**Disclaimer:** I am not associated with Golden Key.<issue_comment>username_1: In general, I think honor societies (including Golden Key) carry very little weight. One exception is Phi Beta Kappa, which (unlike Golden Key) does not require paying a fee to be inducted. I would be suspicious of any honor society that requires payment for membership.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Does membership of honour society carry any professional weight?
>
>
>
No, not in general. At a very early stage in your career, for example when applying to graduate school, it may be useful as a quick indication that you have received high grades. However, the grades themselves are more meaningful than the honor society membership, and in any case grades only matter so much. It's worth mentioning the honor society on your CV, but it won't make a big difference.
Once you are more than a few years past undergraduate studies, neither grades nor honor societies matter.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Listing "prestigious" societies like Phi Beta Kappa or Tau Beta Pi is perfectly acceptable. While it probably won't do a whole lot of good, it also won't do any harm. Do avoid listing any societies where you have to pay dues or pay to be inducted: they are a double-whammy since they give the perception that 1) you are padding your CV with inconsequential honors, and 2) are exhibiting poor judgment by paying to do so.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/23 | 2,263 | 9,391 | <issue_start>username_0: I was asked to compose a recommendation/reference letter for a Computer Engineer that works as a Researcher in the Research Center I am supervisor. I don't know if Academia is the right site to post , but since the nature of the job is Research and people involved "Research Engineers", I believe is the right place.
So, I need to write a great recommendation/reference letter, but the problem is I have never written a letter of this kind before. I've seen many of them, and even more on the web but the problem is that they all look "copy-pasted" and not written in a way that would make me believe that the author of this letter really spent time on it, believing in the skills of his employee and really wanted to recommend them.
I've already written the letter, the best I could and I will like to ask about some parts of it, how they sound and if they could be any better.
1. As a first paragraph, I wrote who I am, the position I have in the Research Center and what is the purpose of this letter:
>
> My name is... I am a ...
>
> The purpose of this letter, is to serve as a reference to my cooperation with Mr ...
>
>
>
2. In the second paragraph I wrote about the position of the person (Research Engineer) and for how long he worked with us:
>
> Mr. X joined our team in the X Research Center as a full-time Research Engineer under an ongoing X month contract...
>
>
>
At this point I don't know how I could point out better the fact the the person was under a normal full-paid contract and not just given a "European Grant" to work with us. I wrote they were `full-time`, but still there are many people that join programs after studies that work for a few months as Engineers in Research Centers. In this case, I want to stress that they were working as a normal Research Engineer, especially chosen for skills and paid a normal salary for the position as Engineer. Maybe add something like `"full paid contract"`
3. In the 3rd paragraph I wrote under what framework the person worked (European project) and a few words where and how they were involved. I didn't want to go into great details here as I believe this stuff could be easily read from their great CV. Is it wise to describe exactly what he did (Names of real-life applications that was part of developing etc). I pointed out that they deeply involved in what they did, how well they integrated with the rest of the people and how motivated they were and that they actively contributed in the project. Anything else I could add here?
4. As a last line I would like to show that I can't recommend them enough, but without getting "too excited". I want it to be serious, I want it to leave no doubts. Also since the person is young and is interested in continuing with post graduate studies, or working as a Researcher or even getting a computer engineer position in a private company. Is it okay if I mention all of them? Usually we recommend someone for one type of position. But this position, working as computer engineer doing research (aka Research Engineer), leaves no doubt that he would be great as a PhD student, as a researcher or as a software engineer. So I wrote:
>
> For all the aforementioned reasons I would like to highly recommend X, as a strong candidate for future postgraduate studies, research and employment offers.
>
>
>
What do you think about it? How could I make it better and is there something I should change? If you don't like some part and you give me an alternative please point out why you don't like the part, as some times its a bit of personal taste and not that something is wrong. Would be great, if you could post some examples of letters you composed or parts of them, or an example from the web that you consider great.<issue_comment>username_1: This is what I would recommend and it is not far off from what you have outlined:
I am assuming your will start the letter cordially to whomever will receive the letter ("Dear so-and-so" or "To whom it may concern"). I also assume you're writing on letter head where your name and contact information and date for the letter is written.
1st part (paragraph)
--------------------
First state that you write the letter on request by the applicant. Follow up by stating who you are in terms of your professional status (expertise) and your relation to the applicant. The purpose is to make the recipient aware of your standing relative to the applicant, it makes it easier to value your comments. This paragraph should obviously not be very long since it is not you who are to be evaluated, but still long enough to provide a fair picture of your qualifications.
2nd part (one or more paragraphs)
---------------------------------
Outline the most important aspect of the applicants merits that are sought for the position, if it is a teaching job then etaching experience, if it is research then research related. It may end up more than one paragraph because you may need to discuss the research done (type of research past and present) in one paragraph and then follow up on the person's ability to attarct funding and colaboration in a second (depending on length). You also need to value the publications briefly in terms of journal impact factors and citations, in other words the quality of the published work.
3rd part (one or more paragraphs)##
-----------------------------------
You need to write about the personal side of the applicant, starting out with for example ability to collaborate and contribute to the research and work environment. This can be followed up bu more personal aspects and "soft values" that descfibes the persons pesronality at work and elsewhere. You obviously need to focius on aspects that may be relevant for evaluating the applicant as a colleague.
Final Statement
---------------
Finish of by summing up the major points above and express your personal support for the person in terms of how the person would fit the announced position. You can for example tie back to your own expoerience and position and value in terms of how you see the applicant relative to others you have worked with and so on.
Final Points to Consider
------------------------
The length of a letter can vary greatly. Honesty is what everyone expects. I think it is valuable to also mention weaknesses as long s they are done fairly and with insight. The employer will want to know the person, not just the glossy exterior. This part is always trickiest to write and also very personal so additional advice is hard to provide.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There was a good link that I'd found on this topic, while applying to graduate school:
[Advice to Graduate School Recommendation Letter Writers](http://cs.brown.edu/~sk/Memos/Grad-School-Recos/)
The above link is a pithy list of points to be kept in mind by new letter writers. As a summary, I'd like to highlight some sections of it that I've found repeated in other such articles as well:
>
> **Be Concrete**
>
>
> If you take away just one piece of concrete advice, let it be this.
>
>
> The single biggest problem with most letters is that they are filled
> with abstract generalities and infinitives. If we don't know you or
> your institution, we can't judge what any of these statements mean
> relative to our standards. Always consider the illustrative anecdote:
>
>
>
> ```
> Due to deadline pressure, I asked him to grow a pumpkin in just one month. As you know it takes over 100 days to grow a pumpkin, but over the weekend he devised a new method to accelerate their growth. On Monday morning I arrived to find not just a pumpkin but a steaming, flavorful pie.
>
> ```
>
> Anecdote about acts of raw coding are only so helpful in understanding
> research potential, but they're better than nothing (see the section
> on Corporate Letters, below). An extra book or paper they read, and
> demonstrated understanding of (again, be concrete about why you
> believe this), goes a long way.
>
>
> **Corporate Letters**
>
>
> An important special case is the corporate letter: when you, the
> letter-writer, work in industry and have no academic affiliation. Many
> corporate letters (like many academic letters, but more so) tend to be
> vapid, clearly written in a different culture and for a different
> audience. Unless they actually did academic research with you, here
> are some suggestions for improving them.
>
>
> A common mistake is to focus on teamwork. This is important even in
> academia, but often this is the primary focus of the letter, which
> makes it less valuable. Of course we care about it, but it's secondary
> to their technical skills.
>
>
> 1. Tell us if they learned something particularly quickly, mastered a
> complex technology, or solved a problem others were stuck on. Give
> us a paragraph of details.
> 2. If you have a concrete reason to evaluate research potential, do so concretely. Otherwise, don't bother.
> 3. Give us a brief bio-sketch, including educational qualifications.
> 4.Put the applicant in context, and tell us the context. It's fine to relate it to your own student days, or to your experience hiring students.
> E.g.
> * Compared to the students I studied with at Cucumber and Melon University, and the ones I now recruit from there, I would put him in
> the top 10%.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/05/24 | 830 | 3,748 | <issue_start>username_0: I have started publishing papers this year - 3 so far, of which 2 are in an international journal, the 3rd in a local journal.
My question is, is there any particular disadvantage with publishing the majority of papers in one or a very limited array of journals? Or is it a case that it makes no difference either way?<issue_comment>username_1: I am sure opinions and traditions vary concerning this question. For me the quality of the journal (say, impact factor) is the most important, you try to get published in good journals. In some cases, the field may be so narrow that only one or a very few journals may be good. In such cases the selection may result in a single journal.
To publish in a variety of journals seems to be a means by itself for many but I think the reasons still vary. There may be advantages in getting published in many journals to show that the research has wider applications and is accepted more generally. It may be a way to avoid the suspicion that you have a back way into a single journal (not that that would be true). In some cases, you may select different journals because you know your ideas are not favoured by someone in a specific journal's editorial board (strategic reason).
So reasons for spreading the publications may vary quite substantially. The main point for me is, however, still that primarily the quality of the journal will decide. I would not chose a different journal just to get a new journal mentioned in my list of publications.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my field (mathematics), the quality of journals is a quite fuzzy notion; we do not rely very much on metrics like the impact factor, but have a subjective and qualitative sense of prestige of journals. Inevitably, the way a given journal is regarded changes from one person to another. As a consequence, publishing in a variety of journals increases the odds that someone looking at your publication list will think "whao, she published in X!".
Another point is that if one publishes a large fraction of its research in one journal, people can wonder whether she has a friend in the editorial board that help her getting accepted there.
All in all, it seems preferable (and possible, given the large amount of journal in the field) to publish in a variety of journal for hiring, promotion and more generally evaluation matters. Of course, the picture is certainly different in other fields.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with @PeterJansson that impact factor is certainly an important factor in selecting a journal. But I would also think about who you want to reach with your paper. Although Google Scholar and similar search engines now ensure a much higher probability of finding your paper based on its title, abstract and keywords, it will only be found by people actively searching for terms associated with your work.
Most researchers still subscribe to specific journals in their field, even if only through e-mail alerts, so I target a journal also for its audience (while trying to select the highest impact factor from this subset). This is especially important if your work bridges several fields.
For example, my research is about human-robot interaction, so I have to decide whether to publish an article in a journal that is read primarily by roboticists or social scientists/psychologists.
In this case, it is also vitally important to adjust the paper to its target demographic. Psychologists don't know (and likely don't care) about my implementation details while roboticists are more likely to be interested in nitty gritty details about the code and less about the nuances of the social psychology theory behind it.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/05/24 | 1,292 | 5,096 | <issue_start>username_0: What are the benefits for the universities and particular professors in recording online courses (MOOC)? Do they get paid by Coursera and similar sites? Do they pursue publicity?
I know that they are providing a useful service by spreading education to everybody in the world, but what do they get in exchange? Do they hope to get more students enrolled, or more public exposure for the university? Or do they do it out of the kindness of their hearts, or for some other reasons?<issue_comment>username_1: I record my lectures (when possible) for the following reasons:
1. Easier access for students who can't attend class. While I generally want students to come to class, there are valid reasons for being absent (e.g., I'm currently teaching classes to military members who often have duty that preempts class attendance). I can also point students to a video to review if they ask me questions explicitly covered in class (and also for general review).
2. Open access. I think it's pretty cool to live in a world where it is possible to get free access to videos that enhance knowledge. I feel like I'm playing my little part by putting my lectures online.
3. Introspective review. It can be extremely beneficial to review your own teaching methods, although I don't have time to do this for all of my classes. I have gone back to particular sections to review, and I almost always find something I could improve upon.
4. (minor) The America's Funniest Videos factor. I've had clips that have been unintentionally hilarious, either because of something I've said, or because of something students have said. :)
Universities have their own reasons for putting classes online, and you've already listed a number of them. I'd like to believe that most of the reasons are altruistic, with sites such as [MIT's OpenCourseWare](http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm) and [Stanford's Online Courses](http://online.stanford.edu/about) providing no-strings-attached courses for free. I would also hope that someone is doing research on these types of course offerings, to see if they are really having benefits to the people that watch them. I don't believe the bottom line at extremely selective schools will ever be hurt by offering free course material, but if they do start feeling the pinch I imagine they will change their models.
Sites like [Courseara](https://www.coursera.org/) are for profit and [starting to make money](http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/04/08/coursera-begins-make-money) by offering to verify certificates of completion for a cost.
>
> Why, then, some [Universities] charge enormous fees for attending courses?
>
>
>
The question of college expense is a can of worms that has as [many differing answers as there are people asking about it](https://www.google.com/search?q=why+is+college+so+expensive%3F&aq=f&oq=why+is+college+so+expensive%3F&aqs=chrome.0.57j60l3j59j62.4484j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8). Selective colleges charge what they do because (1) it is expensive to run a brick-and-mortar college, and (2) the applications keep rising and kids can still get loans, grants, and other aid. Obviously it is much more subtle than that, and it would take [more than a few free economics courses](http://freevideolectures.com/University/UC-Berkeley/Economics/Subject/Page1) to get to the bottom of it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to the good non-financial reasons mentioned, there is also a more financial reason - promoting your own book. I am sure this is not the main reason to give online courses, and having the book is not an explicit requirement, but it does provide a way to benefit financially.
For example, Prof. <NAME> from Stanford and Prof. <NAME> from CalTech both offer free online Machine Learning courses, and both have relatively recent books that are top best-sellers on Amazon.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I believe that the university and professor are promoted by showing their work, people can watch their courses and see how good they are, and spread the word, this will increase the prestige of the university. Another thought is that this shows the university cares about the lessons and gets into this trouble, thus the faculty seem more invovled. A more benevolent thought is that it might help students from other universities.
I, personally, have gained a better opinion about MIT for example, or a different one anyway, having used it's online courses repeatedly to cover the gaps left by my professors.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I was under the impression that part of the reason courses are currently offered free is to gather data about how people use the material/how they study etc, and that's (partly) why they tend to have questionnaires about you at the start.
There's also a more cynical way of looking at it. Shortly after I first finished a course, I got an email saying lots of people had been asking about a course on a particular topic; there wasn't a free course available, but there was one you could do for $400.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/24 | 319 | 1,192 | <issue_start>username_0: I need to attend a competition\seminar with my teenage son. He needs to create a project for this competition on a 36"\*48" trifold poster board. Now the dimensions of this trifold poster board do not make it eligible for taking it as a carry on luggage and its not safe to send it in Checked in luggage for risk of damaging the project that he has done. What are the options for carrying this poster board as a carry on luggage ?<issue_comment>username_1: One common option is to print or create the poster on a large sheet of paper and carry it in a [poster tube](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2448/flying-with-a-poster-tube-as-a-hand-luggage). After you arrive at your destination, buy a blank poster board, and paste your paper onto it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Another option that goes beyond Nate's idea and that would work in an American city: take the poster as a PDF, find a local Kinko's and then print it out. Then apply Nate's solution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I have shipped posters to my hotel before. UPS/FedEx/...will drop your poster at the lobby. It will be waiting for you when you get there...
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/24 | 447 | 1,709 | <issue_start>username_0: A postdoc, postdoctoral research assistant in a university on a contract has a supervisor or a boss. They may not be the PI on the grant which pays the salary as it may contain other universities as well.
In conversation and in email, what is the best term to use for your postdoc boss? Something doesn't seem correct with the term boss or manager, or even supervisor.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is really up to you (both you and to some extent the "boss"). The term "boss" to me is too managerial. I don't like the sound of "my PI", even if the boss is a PI, they are not really your PI. I prefer advisor over supervisor, I think it sounds more supporting.
That said, since you think it is an issue, just refer to the boss as Dr. Smith and then say you are a post doc for Dr. Smith.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've heard "supervisor", "advisor" and "mentor". They can be clarified as "postdoc advisor", etc, to avoid confusion with a Ph.D. advisor.
There's also the simpler "I work with Professor Smith."
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I would lean toward "advisor," as that encapsulates the role best in normal circumstances. You should be an independent researcher as a postdoc, so you shouldn't need much more than advice from your PI.
I personally reserve the term mentor for someone who advises you about (and throughout) your career, not just for a particular project.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: One "clean" way is to use `host`.
>
> I'm a Postdoc at U of U., hosted by Prof. P.
>
>
>
sometimes it might indicate that that's the guy who pays your money, but not necessarily serving as your mentor.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/24 | 311 | 1,159 | <issue_start>username_0: Many journals now are open access only and every article published (authors) must pay a fee.
Sometimes, this info can be hard to find. The journals does not put it visibly on the front page (next to impact factor).
If I want to compare 80 journals in the medical field and their charges - it is not easy.
Is there a site that would 'monitor' this and have data on many journals. (any list with 50+ journals and prices listed will be a good answer) (even if domain specific) (medicine domain is preferred)<issue_comment>username_1: Try [the Sherpa/RoMEO list](http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/), which is the most definitive list of open access journals that I know of. It covers many different fields.
I don't know why you are set on 1000 journals. You can only publish your paper in one journal. What's important is not the number of journals, but finding one good journal that is a great fit for your paper.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no comprehensive list.
Some partial lists are listed below: (please update when new are found)
* <http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/scholarlycommunication/oa_fees.html>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/05/24 | 484 | 2,130 | <issue_start>username_0: **Background:**
I'm just wondering - I'm writing my bachelor's "thesis" in information-systems management, which should in theory be a paper about a hypothesis I make, an experiment and an evaluation.
I have an "experiment" which is comparing reality of information-systems management to various theories of information-systems management.
I have my evaluation.
But my "thesis"... is basically my assumption based on experience that says: "theory is based on assumptions that practice do not always exist". And my "experiment" neither proves nor disproves this triviality, but is supposed to show how you can tailor the management theory for it to be useful under economic constraints to a real specific problem.
**Question:**
What should I call this thing, since it isn't a thesis?<issue_comment>username_1: It **is** a thesis. From what you've written, your hypothesis is that
>
> you can tailor the [information-systems] management theory for it to be useful under economic constraints to a real specific problem
>
>
>
You might also be doing **exploratory research**, or **blue-skies research**, where you don't start with a research question, you start with a direction, subject or area, and go wandering off looking for interesting problems.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It almost sounds like a *literature review* or *critique*, where you have a particular lens or perspective from which to observe and interpret other ideas.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Before creating a hypothesis, it may be necessary to make experiments and discover the *laws* (Ohms law, Newtons laws and the like). Laws are not hypothesis. They do not suppose anything, just describe discovered regularities (correlation, regression, sometimes more complex curve fitting) in a way more compact than raw experimental data. If you have good experimental data without hypothesis, you may simply be in this stage of exploration.
Discovering the laws may be required before any hypothesis can be formulated. Try to propose and test your hypothesis now, maybe it is time.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/05/24 | 1,003 | 3,957 | <issue_start>username_0: While reading [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10202/what-are-the-benefits-for-universities-professors-to-record-online-courses), and specifically [<NAME>'s answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/10204/15723), I started to think about recording my lectures in order to help students review, help students who missed class, and generally provide a way for people to learn about the subjects I teach.
So, how do teachers (with the same goal as I wrote) record their lectures? Do they simply ask someone to record them with a video camera? Do they go in and do more serious editing like you see in Coursera videos where the video transitions between the lecturer's face and slides being drawn on by the lecturer (as described [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2853/device-for-writing-a-lecture-with-a-stylus-for-video-lecture-recording))?
I'm curious what my options are, considering my university provides zero support for this idea of recording lectures.<issue_comment>username_1: If my lecture is done via a presentation (not my preferred method, but necessary for some classes), I record the audio of my lectures along with a "video" of the slides I use. I use Camtasia to record everything, so the only other thing I need is a microphone.
When I give lectures at the blackboard I don't record them. However, for those lectures I provide a fairly detailed set of course notes.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My preference for teaching undergraduate courses (in physics) is:
* Audio-record the lecture using a small MP3 player hung around my neck, and provide the file to students as a MP3 file
* Write coherent notes on the blackboard that students can use as the basis for their own notes
I specifically do *not* do the following, which I believe is harmful to students' learning in such courses:
* Provide detailed printed notes
* Use slides (except for occasional complex Figures and animations)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The system my department uses for large lecture classes captures two video feeds: One showing the lecturer and the screen, taken from a camera mounted on the ceiling, the other showing whatever is currently being projected onto the screen, captured on route to the projector. (I normally lecture with a document camera, printer paper, [Sharpies](http://www.sharpie.com/Pages/GlobalLanding.aspx), and the [occasional](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuisenaire_rods) [small](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dice#Non-cubic) [prop](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Hanoi).) Audio is captured separately from a microphone on the instructor's lapel.
My department's playback system allows the students to show either or both videos, at adjustable sizes, with synchronized playback, and to slow down or speed up playback. The capturing system automatically locates transitions between slides (or, in my case, new pieces of paper) and provides navigation landmarks for the students.
The system is almost entirely automated. In particular, the lecture videos are not edited at all.
I also provide detailed [course notes](http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/~jeffe/teaching/algorithms/).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: An old question, but a new answer.
Since COVID-19, I've become more familiar with tools such as:
* [Zoom](https://zoom.us/)
* [Streamlabs](https://streamlabs.com/)
and, depending on the audience, I use one or the other.
Streamlabs allows me to compose a video view that includes my laptop screen, the webcam in the corner, and some text to title the video. I can then share the output of Streamlabs on Zoom, if that is the system the school uses, or stream the output straight to YouTube for playback later.
Even if the students are in-person, many of them (once or twice a semester) miss class and are thankful for the video version of each class so they don't fall to far behind.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/05/25 | 371 | 1,622 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a list of references in my CV. One of them happens to be the Dean of the graduate school and the other a Vice Chancellor. Both of these roles are administrative and their primary position is that of a Professor. Would listing these referees as
```
<NAME>
Professor and Dean of the Graduate School
University of Foo
<NAME>
Professor and Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs
University of Bar
```
be better (give more credence/weight) than simply listing them as a Professor. I know that ultimately what they write in those letters is what matters, but for the purposes of this question, it can be safely assumed that both letters are going to be stellar recommendations.<issue_comment>username_1: You haven't said what the letters are for. If it's for a position based on academic credentials (whether in academia or industry), I doubt it makes much of a difference. If the position involves administrative responsibilities, then mentioning this would help, so the people requesting the letter would make sure to ask them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The thing to remember here is that your reference letter writers will be providing official letters, and therefore will be including their full titles (presumably the letterhead will list this). In such a case, it doesn't really seem to make much sense to "hide" the status of the person writing the letter. Moreover, if the position is one which will include some administrative duties, a letter of reference from someone doing university administration might even be a plus.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/05/25 | 1,153 | 5,004 | <issue_start>username_0: It seems like most PhD applications require at least two reference letter. One of my Master's thesis supervisors (a PhD) has written me a reference letter. Can I ask my other supervisor (a PhD student) to write me the second one, or would that be redundant?
The other alternative letter writers are all professors who have only seen me in class and can't really comment on my research potential.<issue_comment>username_1: The main point of the letters of recommendation are to comment on your abilities, and to place them in the context of other people the recommender has known and worked with. The better they can comment, and the larger the number of people the recommender has worked with and therefore can compare you to, the better the recommendation will likely be.
For this reason, it is not nearly as helpful to get a letter from a PhD student as from someone who is more experienced and has likely worked with more master's students. On the other hand, if the option is to get a letter who can *only* comment on your class work, I would opt for including the PhD student's recommendation letter.
However, if you have had a non-academic person (perhaps an internship supervisor or similar) in a related discipline who could comment on your work, this might be a suitable alternative. (See username_3's answer below.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As it was mentioned before, you can obtain reference letters from your supervisors, in case that you have done some internship job for obtaining your master´s.
Also you can talk directly with one of your past professors, and explain them about your research interests (try to check first which professors have the same research interests). Then you can ask, in a nice way, if they can give you a hand with a recommendation letter. Most of the time they will agree to help you with that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I've sat on my department's graduate studies committee during application season, and so I can provide at least one point of anecdata for how PhD application recommendation letters are used, at least in my tiny corner of the academy. YMMV.
First, These letters are among the last things that are looked at. We don't have rigorous thresholds for grades, GRE scores, subject GRE scores, publications, etc. But all of those things are used to "objectively" sort the pool. First the obvious admits are skimmed off the top, and fellowship offers are made to some of them. This is the first place where letters are important, since quotes are mined from those letters to try and win funding for these students from the University (i.e., we entice the student with a prestigious award, and the department doesn't even have to pay for her!) The money quote is usually a ranking and/or direct comparison -- *"In my twenty years at Giant State University, I've seen no more than 5 students of X's caliber. I would say her talents remind me of Y's at that age, who is now a professor at Prestigious U"* -- and this is why even a mediocre teaching letter is more useful for this purpose than a nice letter from a PhD student (who can not be counted on to have a reasonable intuition for another's future potential).
Second, we work our way down to the marginal cases; this is much more difficult since the marginal cases require a more holistic take on the application package. No one gets immediately thrown out just for bad grades or a bad subject GRE score, but we expect some explanation of a mitigating circumstance (not an excuse!) in the personal statement, and hopefully reflected in the letters as well. For example, if you were dinged in the first pass for a low GPA, we would like to see that it was a bad first year (and not a bad fifth...); that you are on an upswing. If you think you might be a marginal case for whatever reason, the letter from the PhD student might be helpful -- perhaps you don't have any publications, but the PhD student can vouch for your work and verify that you have something in preparation, or explain why your project failed (projects often fail!) but that nonetheless you mastered some state-of-the-art technique on the way.
*On the other hand* it is a big waving red flag if those things are then *not* pointed out by your actual boss (the PhD holding supervisor). If you think the student will write a *better* letter, then you're probably best off having that student lobby on your behalf with the professor, to make sure the *professor's* letter is strong, and then get a second letter from someone else.
I would strongly recommend you do not ask for a letter from a non-academic unless it was an actual research position (and even then, these can be iffy if the supervisor has no letter-writing experience). On occasion we see glowing letters from a student's supervisor at their summer construction job, or a call center for a political campaign. Well-rounded students are great, but such letters are almost useless.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
Subsets and Splits